browser_resize

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations. Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description does not clarify the nature of the change (e.g., viewport size affects layout, may cause re-rendering). It merely restates the action without elaborating on side effects or 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?

The description is a single sentence with no excess, satisfying conciseness. However, it lacks structural elements like a lead with key info or any breakdown of behavior; it is adequate but adds nothing beyond the bare statement.

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?

For a simple tool with full parameter documentation, the description could suffice, but it ignores the destructiveHint annotation and does not mention any return value, asynchronous behavior, or side effects. Given the openWorldHint and destructiveHint, the description should clarify the impact, but it is minimal and leaves the agent to guess.

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 coverage is 100% with straightforward descriptions for both width and height, so the schema fully documents the parameters. The description does not add any additional meaning, but since the baseline is 3 for high coverage, this is acceptable.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Resize' and the resource 'browser window', making the core purpose unambiguous. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like browser_navigate or browser_snapshot, but the intent is specific enough that an agent can likely infer what it does without confusion.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone. With many browser_* siblings, this is a notable gap.

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