browser_reload_extension

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so generously: it describes the ack-then-reload sequence, the ~100ms timing, how the bridge WebSocket reconnects via existing background logic, and that content scripts in open tabs survive and re-inject lazily. It also flags a hard prerequisite that would otherwise cause silent failure.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then usage, then mechanics, then the caveat — good ordering with no filler sentences. It runs slightly long and references internal implementation details (background.js, forwardToContent) that an agent cannot act on, which is minor noise but not harmful.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, everything an agent needs is present: the effect, the timing, the side effects on content scripts, and the one condition under which it fails. Nothing material is left to inference.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a parameterless tool is 4. The description correctly implies no arguments are needed.

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 ('Hot-reload the Kitsune extension in the browser') and makes clear it targets the extension itself, not a page — the distinction that matters against the many tab/page tools in the sibling list. The contrast with manually toggling in about:addons further pins down the scope.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it ('after editing the extension source to pick up changes') and when it will not work ('only works once you're already on a version of the extension that has this action handler; the very first install requires the usual about:addons toggle'). Both the triggering condition and the failure case are named.

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