session_browser_keep_open

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly discloses what happens when enabled vs disabled, the default state, and notes the separation from the JWT browser setting. It doesn't discuss security implications or whether the change applies to future sessions, but coverage is strong for the tool's simplicity.

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 well-structured and front-loaded: a clear summary, behavioral breakdown, use case, sibling distinction, argument definition, and return note. Every sentence adds information and there is no significant fluff.

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 one-boolean-parameter configuration toggle with no output schema and no annotations, the description is complete. It explains the behavior, the default, the motivating use case, the distinction from a similar setting, and the expected return. An agent has enough to invoke it correctly.

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 schema only exposes a boolean 'enabled' with no description, while the tool's description explicitly defines True as 'keep browser open after auth' and False as 'close it,' and even notes the default. This adds meaningful semantic value beyond the bare schema.

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?

States a specific verb ('Enable or disable') and a specific resource ('browser persistence for session authentication'). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the JWT browser control, so an agent can tell it apart from related browser/session tools without opening the schema.

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?

Provides clear usage context: enabling is useful for multiple document operations so the user only logs in once, and the default behavior is explained. It does not enumerate explicit 'when not to use' conditions beyond the JWT separation, but the guidance is sufficient for this simple toggle.

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