firefox_restart

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden. It states that the tool restarts Firefox, which implies termination and restart, but it does not disclose potential side effects like losing open tabs, clearing session state, or whether the action is destructive. Given the nature of a restart, some behavior is implied, but explicit disclosure of consequences is missing.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the action ('Restart Firefox') and then adds the usage condition. There is no fluff, and every word serves a purpose.

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 simple, parameterless tool with no output schema, the description provides enough context: what it does, when to use it, and its scope. It does not describe the return value, but that is likely irrelevant for a restart operation. The only minor gap is the lack of explicit side-effect disclosure, which is already penalized under behavioral transparency.

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 has zero parameters, and the schema is empty. According to the rubric, a baseline of 4 is appropriate when no parameters exist. The description adds no parameter information, which is fine since there are none to explain.

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 clear, specific action: 'Restart Firefox.' It identifies the resource (Firefox) and the operation, and distinguishes it from siblings like firefox_status by specifying the action and context. It also notes 'Firefox-only,' which sets scope.

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?

Explicit usage conditions are provided: 'Use this when the browser stops responding or reports a stale automation session.' This tells the agent exactly when to invoke it, and the 'Firefox-only' qualifier warns against use on other browsers. No alternative tools are named, but the condition is clear and actionable.

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