Manage Chrome extensions by enabling, disabling, reloading, or opening their options and popups.
Perform management action on a Chrome extension: enable, disable, reload, open options, or open popup.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| action | Yes | Action to perform | |
| extension_id | Yes | The extension ID (from browser_list_extensions) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.8.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It reveals that this is a mutation tool and what actions are possible, but does not state required permissions, side effects, reversibility, or what happens when enabling, disabling, or reloading an extension.
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, front-loaded sentence that lists the available actions without any wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple two-parameter tool.
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 low complexity, high schema coverage, and absence of an output schema, the description is nearly complete for correct invocation. It could still add prerequisites or side-effect information, since there are no annotations to cover those behavioral details.
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 both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description's action list mirrors the action enum rather than adding new meaning, which matches the baseline of 3 when the schema does the heavy lifting.
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 states a specific verb and resource: perform management actions on a Chrome extension, and enumerates the supported actions. It clearly distinguishes this tool from browser_list_extensions, though it does not explicitly name that or any other sibling tool.
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 lists the possible actions but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no when-not conditions. Usage is only implied by the action list.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.