get_console_context

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

The description discloses a critical side effect beyond the annotations: it writes a full log file to .customaise/console-context.json by default and returns only counts plus the path. It also clarifies that inline output writes nothing to disk. This meaningfully complements the readOnlyHint: false annotation without contradicting it.

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 dense but every sentence earns its place: purpose, recommended usage, side effect, return behavior, and fallback guidance. It is front-loaded with the core purpose before the operational details.

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?

Since there is no output schema, the description correctly explains what the tool returns: counts plus the file path by default, or the whole log inline. It also gives enough operational detail for an agent to use the tool safely and effectively without needing more documentation.

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 input schema already documents all three parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds practical meaning to the output parameter by explaining why you might choose inline instead of file, which goes beyond the schema's enum descriptions.

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 and resource: getting console logs from the browser, including errors, warnings, and userscript GM_log output. It clearly distinguishes the tool's purpose from sibling tools by describing what type of data it retrieves and when to use it.

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 recommends using this tool after reload_tab to check for script runtime errors. It also provides clear context for choosing output modes, including when to use inline versus file output. However, it does not name or exclude an alternative sibling tool explicitly.

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