Get Browser Cookies

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, establishing safety. The description adds valuable behavioral context: cookies are normalized and values are redacted by default, which is critical for privacy. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise sentence that immediately conveys the core action and key nuance (redaction). There is no extraneous information, and it is front-loaded for quick comprehension.

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 is simple with three boolean parameters, and the description covers the main behavioral nuance (redaction). An output schema exists to detail return values. While 'normalized' is not elaborated, the combination of annotations, schema, and description provides sufficient context for typical use.

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?

Only the 'include_values' parameter has a schema description; the description mentions redaction, which relates to this parameter. However, 'all_info' and 'all_domains' have no explanation in either the schema or description, leaving their semantics unclear. With 33% schema coverage, the description does not adequately compensate for the gap.

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 reads cookies, specifies they are normalized, and notes that values are redacted by default. The verb 'read' and resource 'cookies' are explicit, and there are no sibling tools with similar functionality, so purpose is unambiguous.

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 description implies use for reading cookies without explicit when/when-not guidance. However, since no sibling tools compete for this function, the context is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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