firefox_parse_extensions_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states the purpose but does not mention read-only nature, potential side effects, permissions, or error behavior. Parsing implies reading, but this is not explicitly stated, leaving a transparency gap for mutation-aware agents.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and followed by a practical path hint. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundant text or unnecessary details.

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 presence of an output schema and full parameter descriptions, the description covers the essential purpose and gives a helpful path format hint. It lacks notes on edge cases or behavior on invalid paths, but for a straightforward parse tool, it is adequately complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so all parameters are already described in the schema. The description adds the typical profile path, which gives helpful context for the required 'profile_path' parameter, but it does not elaborate on 'name', 'limit', or 'extension_id' beyond what the schema provides. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 a specific action ('Parse') and resource ('Firefox installed extension metadata'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like firefox_parse_history_tool or chromium_parse_extensions_tool. The verb and object are 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 usage through the name and the typical profile path example, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this over other Firefox parse tools or provide exclusions. The path hint is useful contextual guidance, but no alternative tools are mentioned.

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