browser_pages

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool lists all tabs across all BrowserContexts, provides stable page IDs, and marks the current selected page. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is non-destructive or whether it changes the current selection.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the verb and scope, includes the key detail of stable page_id, and mentions the selected-page marker. Every word contributes; there is no filler.

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?

For a parameterless listing tool with an output schema, the description is fairly complete: it specifies the scope (all BrowserContexts), the stable identifier, and the selected-page flag. The only missing piece is an explicit statement about read-only behavior, but the operation's nature and the output schema mitigate that.

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 has zero parameters, so the schema fully documents that nothing is needed. The description correctly says nothing about parameters. Baseline 4 for zero-param tools applies.

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 the specific verb '列出' (list) and clearly identifies the resource: all tabs across all BrowserContexts with stable page_id, and marks the currently selected page. This differentiates it from sibling tools like browser_select_page or browser_open by focusing on read-only listing rather than selection or creation.

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 implies the tool is for obtaining an overview of open pages, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives such as browser_session or browser_select_page. No when-not scenarios or alternative tool names are mentioned.

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