browser_replay

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses deterministic replay, coordinate-based actions, and the step-by-step report output. It does not cover potential side effects or authentication needs, but for a replay tool the description is sufficiently transparent.

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 with no wasted words. The key information is front-loaded: the purpose, the deterministic nature, and the parameter usage.

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 simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description covers what the tool does, how to use it, and what it returns. It is complete for an agent to decide when and how to invoke it.

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% and the schema describes bundlePath. The description adds value by explaining that omitting bundlePath replays the current session and that the bundle comes from browser_export_repro, which aids selection.

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 tool replays a recorded session to reproduce a bug. The verb 'replay' and resource 'recorded session' are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like browser_export_repro (export) and browser_start_recording (record).

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?

It explains when to use bundlePath (for previously exported bundles) vs omitting it (current session). It does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or list alternatives, but the context is clear given sibling tools like browser_run_scenario.

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