browser_switchTab

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and parameter, with no mention of side effects, error handling, or return value, leaving the agent without insight into what happens after switching.

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 sentence with no redundant words. It is concise and to the point, earning its place without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, so the description and schema provide a basic understanding. However, it lacks guidance on how to obtain targetId (e.g., via browser_listTabs) and what happens after switching, making it minimally sufficient but not fully 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?

The input schema fully describes targetId as 'Target tab ID to switch to' (100% coverage). The description adds no new semantic detail beyond restating that switching is done 'by targetId', so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 verb 'Switch' and the resource 'browser tab' with the mechanism 'by targetId'. It is distinct from sibling tools like browser_newTab, browser_closeTab, and browser_goto.

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 usage context is clear: you need a targetId (likely from browser_listTabs) to switch to an existing tab. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or prerequisites, but the purpose is unambiguous and distinct from other tab-related tools.

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