browser_get_cookies

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that ALL cookies are returned (no filtering) and that scope is the current tab, but says nothing about return format, whether httpOnly/session cookies are included, or any security/permission implications.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the action, scope, and payload type are all conveyed economically.

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?

For a trivial zero-parameter read tool this is close to adequate, but with no annotations and no output schema the description leaves the return structure and any scope caveats implicit, which an agent would need to discover at call time.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. It adds no parameter detail, but none is needed.

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?

States a specific verb (Retrieve) and resource (cookies) with an explicit scope (current tab), and the parenthetical examples (auth tokens, session IDs) clarify the payload. It is easily distinguished from the write-side sibling browser_set_cookie, though it does not explicitly contrast with browser_get_storage.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The agent must infer that this reads cookies for the active tab and cannot tell from the description how it differs from browser_get_storage or browser_clear_storage, nor whether any prerequisite (e.g., a selected tab) is required.

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