get_tabs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false; the description reinforces with 'Read-only' and adds behavioral detail about listing every open tab and the include_windows effect on window attributes. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences that front-load the core function and then expand on usage and the optional parameter. Every sentence earns its place; no fluff.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description provides all necessary return fields, usage guidance, and safety context, making it fully self-contained.

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?

Though schema covers include_windows at 100%, the description adds meaning by explaining why you'd set it (before moving/tiling, to identify monitor) and what it returns (position, size, state, type), going beyond the schema's 'bounds, state, type and tab count'.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' with a clear resource 'every open tab' and enumerates the exact fields returned (id, url, title, active flag). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_frames or get_page_info.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'Use it to find a tab_id when the implicit target (last navigated tab, else the active one) is not the tab you mean.' Also guides the include_windows option for moving/tiling and determining monitor placement, giving practical context.

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