driver_session

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

Adds context beyond annotations: describes status output format (single vs array with isDefault), stop behavior without appIdentifier (stops all), and connection via WebSocket. Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true, which description complements by explaining idempotent behavior.

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?

Well-structured with front-loaded purpose, then action details, then usage notes. Slightly verbose but every sentence adds value, including alternatives. Could be trimmed without losing substance.

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?

Covers all important aspects: required before other tools, explains status output format, mentions WebSocket connection, sets context within sibling tools. No output schema, but description adequately explains return behavior.

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?

All parameters have descriptions (100% coverage). Description adds value: host falls back to env vars, port defaults to 9223, appIdentifier only used with stop. Explains the identifier field uniquely identifies apps.

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?

Clearly states the tool is for Tauri apps only, managing automation sessions with start/stop/status actions. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by specifying it's for Tauri automation and not for browser (Chrome DevTools MCP) or Electron apps.

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 states when to use: required before using any webview_* or ipc_* tools. Also specifies when not to use: for browser automation or Electron apps. Provides details on concurrent connections and default app behavior.

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