browser_throttle_network

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must bear the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that the tool throttles bandwidth and adds latency, and that preset 'off' restores normal speed. However, it does not mention scope (e.g., whether throttling applies to all tabs or just the current one), persistence, or other side effects like potential impact on other browser operations.

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 concise, with two short paragraphs. The first paragraph states the purpose and use cases; the second provides usage details. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is logical.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, use cases, parameter behavior, and how to disable. Given that there is no output schema and the tool is simple (4 parameters), it is largely complete. A minor gap is the lack of clarity on scope (e.g., whether it affects the current browsing context only).

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 100%, and all parameters are well-described in the schema. The description adds value by explaining the purpose of presets, giving example values, and clarifying that preset overrides raw parameters. It also explicitly states how to disable throttling.

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 ('emulate slow network conditions by throttling bandwidth and adding latency') and clearly identifies the resource (network conditions). It distinguishes this tool from sibling browser tools like navigate, screenshot, etc., which have different purposes.

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?

The description explicitly states when to use the tool ('testing loading states, skeleton screens, and timeout handling') and explains how to use it via presets or raw values, including how to disable throttling. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the guidance is clear and practical.

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