browser

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only lists action names without explaining side effects, state changes, prerequisites, or return values. For example, it does not state that 'close' terminates the browser session or that 'pdf' generates a file.

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 and front-loaded with a clear purpose statement. The action list is efficient, though it is presented as an unformatted run-on list that could be better organized into groups or categories.

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 complexity (13 parameters, multiple actions, no output schema), the description is minimal and incomplete. It does not explain how actions relate to parameters, expected outcomes, or operational requirements, making it insufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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%, so the parameter descriptions already document each field's meaning. The description adds little beyond the schema, mainly repeating action names already present in the 'action' parameter description. It does not map actions to required parameters.

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 'Control a web browser' and lists the available actions, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like web_search and web_fetch. However, it does not explain what each action does in detail, so it is clear but not deeply specific.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like web_fetch or web_search. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or scenarios where one tool would be preferred over another.

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