list_tabs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one meaningful trait: listing does not select or focus a tab, i.e. it is side-effect free. However, it says nothing about ordering, scope (current window vs all windows), or whether the list can change between calls, leaving behavioral gaps for a no-annotation tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that states the action, the returned data, and the key non-side-effect guarantee with zero filler. Every clause earns its place.

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 simple enumeration tool with no output schema, the description covers the essentials: what is returned and that focus is unchanged. It is slightly short on return ordering and scope (which tabs are included), which an agent might want before relying on the IDs.

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?

Only one optional parameter exists and schema description coverage is 100%, so the timeout semantics (phase timeout, download 120000) are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 gives a specific verb ('List') and resource ('tabs') and names the returned fields (stable page-target IDs, titles, URLs), so the agent knows exactly what it produces. It implicitly separates itself from a focus/select action, but never names a sibling such as observe or goto, so differentiation is contextual rather than explicit.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus observe, goto, or act, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given. The only hint is the behavioral contrast ('without selecting/focusing a tab'), which implies the use case but never instructs the agent.

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