browser_tab_switch

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only restates the action. It omits side effects, error behavior when a tab doesn't exist, what wait_seconds does, and any permission or session requirements.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; every word earns its place. It is arguably too terse given the tool's parameter surface, but that is a completeness issue rather than structural waste.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and four parameters, the description is not complete enough. An output schema exists so return values needn't be explained, but session_id, wait_seconds, and the tab_id/index relationship are all left undocumented.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate but only names two of four parameters (tab_id, index). It gives no format for tab_id, no index range, no mutual-exclusivity rule, and never mentions the required session_id or the wait_seconds parameter.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb ('Switch') and resource ('active tab') with the selection mechanism ('by tab_id or index'). Distinguishes itself from tab_new/tab_close, but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like browser_tab_current or browser_tab_list.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No when-to-use guidance or alternatives are given. It doesn't say which of tab_id/index to prefer, whether both can be supplied, or how it relates to browser_tab_current. Usage is only implied by the phrase 'by tab_id or index'.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.