List browsers

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

The description adds value by specifying the scope ('daemon-managed browser instances and their named pages'), which goes beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It implies a listing operation with no side effects, consistent with the annotation. However, it does not disclose the output format (e.g., whether results are flat or hierarchical), but this is acceptable for a listing tool with no output schema.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. Every word earns its place, with no extraneous information.

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 has no parameters, no output schema, and the readOnlyHint annotation covers safety, the description fully specifies the tool's purpose and scope. It is complete for its simplicity.

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?

There are zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so the description has no need to add parameter details. The baseline of 3 applies; there is no additional meaning to add beyond what the schema already conveys.

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 uses a clear verb ('List') and specific resources ('daemon-managed browser instances and their named pages'). It unambiguously identifies the scope (daemon-managed) and the distinction between browsers and pages, which differentiates it from siblings like dev_browser_list_pages.

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 implicitly suggests use when you want an overview of browser instances, but does not explicitly state when to use this versus dev_browser_list_pages (which lists pages within a browser), nor does it provide any exclusion criteria or context about prerequisites. It is adequate but lacks explicit guidance.

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