firefox_parse_cookies_tool

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full responsibility. It merely says 'Parse Firefox cookies' without disclosing side effects, permissions, or whether cookie values may remain encrypted (relevant because a decrypt sibling exists). The read-only nature and limitations are not addressed.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes a useful illustrative path. Every word earns its place and there is no fluff.

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?

While the output schema and parameter documentation cover return values and inputs, the description fails to position this tool relative to firefox_decrypt_cookies_tool. An agent cannot tell if this tool extracts encrypted cookie values or if it performs a fundamentally different operation, making selection ambiguous.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a concrete typical profile path example, which aids understanding of the profile_path parameter, but does not add meaning for host, name, or limit filters beyond the schema.

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 ('Parse'), the resource ('Firefox cookies'), and the context ('from a browser profile'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like firefox_decrypt_cookies_tool (which decrypts) and chromium_parse_cookies_tool (different browser).

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as firefox_decrypt_cookies_tool. The typical profile path is a hint for parameter formatting, not a usage context. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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