browse_switch_tab

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, yet it says nothing about what switching entails: whether the page waits to load, what happens on an out-of-range index, or whether it returns the newly active tab. For a state-changing navigation tool this is a notable gap.

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?

One short sentence with the key qualifier ('by index from browse_tabs') front and center; nothing extraneous.

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-parameter navigation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential invocation but omits error behavior and post-switch state, which an agent needs to sequence multi-step browser actions reliably.

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 labels the parameter 'Index' at 0% coverage, but the description supplies the crucial missing meaning: the index is a position in the tab list returned by browse_tabs. That resolves ambiguity about zero- vs one-based ordering and where the value comes from. It could still note whether ordering is stable or reflects the last snapshot.

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+resource ('Switch the active tab') and distinguishes it from the sibling browse_tabs by clarifying that the index comes from that list. It stops short of explicitly saying it activates/focuses the tab for subsequent actions, but an agent can still tell it apart from browse_tabs.

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 reference to browse_tabs implies the intended workflow (list tabs, then switch by index), but there is no explicit statement of when to use this versus just opening a new tab, nor any precondition or failure guidance.

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