arc_create_tab

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

Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive, non-idempotent behavior. The description adds that it returns a verified tab id, but does not disclose other behavioral traits like whether the tab is activated or what 'select' parameter does.

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 sentence with no extraneous words. It is efficient but sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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 4 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and an output schema, the description is too sparse. It fails to explain parameter semantics, return value structure, or how it differs from similar tools like arc_open_url.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description does not explain any parameters beyond implying space_id and url. The optional parameters window_id and select are not described, leaving the agent without necessary semantic context.

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 clearly states the tool creates a new Arc tab in a specific space and returns a verified tab id. It uses a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like arc_open_url, which might also create a tab.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as arc_open_url or arc_select_tab. The description lacks any 'when not to use' or context for conditional use.

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