browser_console_logs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that logs are buffered (implying capture rather than live streaming) and names a hard dependency, but says nothing about whether the buffer is drained or retained after retrieval, result limits, or ordering. Enough to be viable, not enough to be rich.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence naming the action, the resource, and the key precondition. Every clause earns its place with no filler.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage, the description needs to do more heavy lifting than it does. The core purpose and one hard prerequisite are covered, but filtering semantics (level, since) and return behavior are left entirely for the agent to guess.

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 0% across three parameters (level, since, tab_id) with no enums. The description only loosely implies tab_id via 'from a tab' and says nothing about what 'level' accepts (log level names?) or what 'since' measures (timestamp, index, sequence number). With zero schema-side documentation, the description should compensate and does not.

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 and resource: 'Return buffered console logs from a tab.' The mention of the buffered nature and the tab scope distinguishes it from the sibling browser_watch_console, which is referenced as a prerequisite. It is less clear against browser_logs, but the 'console' qualifier does meaningful work.

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?

Gives an explicit precondition: 'requires browser_watch_console first.' This tells the agent when the tool is callable and implicitly routes it to the sibling that must run beforehand. No exclusions or alternative-selection guidance are offered, so it stops short of a 5.

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