chrome_tab

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses non-obvious behavior: new/grouped tabs join this session's tab group, and target-less actions affect the automation tab. This is meaningful beyond the schema, though it remains silent on return shapes and whether close is irreversible.

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 three tight sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the action list, then appends the two most important behavioral clarifications in a compact way.

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?

The tool has seven parameters, an enum of varied actions, and no output schema. The description omits return-value semantics for informational actions like list, inspect, and version, and does not clarify what 'new' does when url is absent. These gaps matter for an agent selecting and invoking the tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 86%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds targeting context (targetId/urlIncludes/titleIncludes) and the no-target fallback, but it does not add substantive detail about parameter interactions beyond what the schema already encodes.

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 enumerates a precise set of verbs ('List, create, activate, close, group, ungroup, or inspect') applied to a specific resource (tabs in the user's existing Chrome profile). This distinguishes it clearly from sibling tools like chrome_launch, chrome_navigate, or chrome_inspect.

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?

It explains the key targeting rule: activate/close/group/ungroup require a target, and if none is supplied they fall back to the session's automation tab. This gives clear context for choosing call patterns, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools.

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