firefox_decrypt_logins_tool

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context ('Attempt' indicates possible failure, requires NSS libs, optional primary_password) but does not mention failure modes, whether the operation is read-only, or how errors are handled. This is moderate transparency.

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 consists of three concise, information-dense sentences: purpose, typical path, and dependencies. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or irrelevant detail.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity, the description includes purpose, prerequisites, and a typical path. An output schema exists, so return value explanation is unnecessary. It could benefit from explicit guidance on when to prefer this over parse-only tools, but overall it is complete enough for a well-scoped decryption tool.

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 input schema already covers all 5 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the typical profile path structure and clarifying that primary_password is optional and NSS libs are required, which helps agents construct parameters correctly beyond schema descriptions.

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 action 'decrypt' and the resource 'Firefox saved passwords', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like firefox_parse_logins_tool (which likely parses without decryption) and firefox_decrypt_cookies_tool (which targets cookies). The verb+resource pairing is specific and 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 provides clear usage context by giving a typical profile path and required dependencies (NSS libs, optional primary password), implying when this tool is appropriate. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion scenarios, so it falls 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.