list_tabs

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden and does real work: it discloses agent-scoped visibility, the TAB_NOT_OWNED rejection for cross-agent access, and a configurable cap of 8 (range 1-64). It does not say whether exceeding the cap truncates results or errors, which is the one behavioral gap for a listing tool.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and return shape, then usage, then related tools, then multi-agent constraints — a good information ordering. The telegraphic semicolon-dense final sentence ('agent-scoped tabs; cross-agent reject...') is efficient but slightly terse.

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 parameters and no output schema, the description supplies the return fields, the usage trigger, sibling routing, and multi-agent constraints. Nearly complete; the only omission is what happens at the tab cap boundary (error vs. truncation).

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The schema is empty and consistent with the description's no-argument framing.

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+resource ('List all open browser tabs') plus the exact fields returned (title, URL, active status) and the return shape (array of tab objects). Clearly separable from open_tab/switch_tab/close_tab siblings.

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?

Explicit 'When to use: to see all open tabs before switching' plus a Related list naming switch_tab and open_tab with their roles. The agent gets both the trigger condition and the alternatives in one place.

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