list-browsers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. The verb 'Lists' strongly implies a non-mutating read operation, which is helpful. However, it does not clarify how 'active' is determined, whether filters combine, or what the response contains beyond the inferred list of browsers.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant content. Every word contributes meaning, and it communicates the core intent immediately.

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 low-complexity read-only listing tool with no required parameters and fully documented optional filters, the description is reasonably complete. It does not detail return shape or edge cases like zero active instances, but those are minor given the simplicity of the operation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents all three parameters (tags, type, includeStats) with adequate descriptions. The tool description itself adds no additional parameter-level detail, so the baseline score of 3 is 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 'Lists all active browser instances' uses a specific verb ('Lists'), a clear resource ('browser instances'), and a scope qualifier ('active'). It is clearly distinct from sibling operations like start-browser or close-browser, though it does not explicitly differentiate from get-context-info or other query-like tools.

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 usage context is implied: use this when you need to see currently active browser instances. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer list-browsers over related tools like get-context-info, nor any mention of exclusions or prerequisites.

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