browser_console_messages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. However, the description adds no behavioral context, such as the default behavior of returning only messages since the last navigation (unless all=true) or the ability to save to a file. This is a significant gap given the schema's richness.

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 short sentence, making it very concise. However, it is so terse that it omits key behavioral details, and the lack of structure means it doesn't front-load helpful information. It's not verbose, but it's minimally functional.

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?

Given the tool has three parameters, a required parameter, and no output schema, the description should explain return behavior and filtering semantics. It only says 'Returns all console messages' without mentioning level filtering, the 'all' flag, or file output, leaving the agent under-informed for correct invocation.

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 fully explains each parameter. The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, which aligns with the baseline 3 for high coverage.

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 a clear verb and resource ('Returns all console messages'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like browser_network_requests. However, 'all' is slightly ambiguous because the tool can filter by level and time scope, so it's not fully specific.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description doesn't mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like browser_network_requests, nor any scenario-specific advice. Users must infer its purpose solely from the name and brief description.

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