start-browser

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses that an ID is auto-generated, but it does not say that this launches a persistent browser process, that the instance can later be closed with close-browser, or what happens after creation. The lifecycle and side-effect behavior is left unexplained.

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 one sentence with no filler and front-loads the action and resource. It is efficient, but at nine words it is arguably too terse for a tool with seven optional parameters and no annotations, so it does not earn a 5.

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?

With no output schema, the description should say what the tool returns and how to use the generated ID with sibling tools, but it only hints at an auto-generated ID. It also omits the persistence/cleanup lifecycle. The full parameter schema prevents this from being a 1, but the missing output and lifecycle context is significant.

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 input schema documents all 7 parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond clarifying that the ID is auto-generated, which helps explain why no ID parameter is needed. That is marginal but sufficient.

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 names a specific action ('Creates'), a specific resource ('new browser context'), and an outcome ('auto-generated unique ID'). This clearly separates start-browser from siblings list-browsers and close-browser, which manage existing contexts.

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 verb and 'new' imply this tool should be used when a fresh browser context is needed, but the description does not explicitly state when not to use it or point to alternatives such as list-browsers for existing contexts. No prerequisites or cleanup guidance is provided.

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