List or inspect shared tab groups

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful non-obvious context: only tabs shared with the agent appear as members, and the incomplete_membership flag signals hidden tabs — real behavioral value beyond the annotations.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the primary list action before the get variant, and the visibility caveat packed into the second sentence. Zero wasted words.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description partially compensates by describing the membership scoping and the incomplete_membership signal. It is nearly complete for a read-only, zero-required-parameter tool, though the action/handle relationship could be made explicit.

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 only 33% (only browser_instance_id is documented), so the description carries the burden. It connects 'get one by handle' to the handle parameter and implies the two action modes, but does not explain the action/handle dependency or the default action, leaving gaps.

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 specific verbs (list, get) and a specific resource (Firefox tab groups shared with the agent), plus the visibility scope. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the singular sibling 'browser_group', so it is clear but not fully sibling-disambiguated.

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?

'List ... or get one by handle' implicitly maps to the action=list/action=get modes, so usage is inferable. However, it never states when to prefer this over browser_group or browser_request_access, and offers no explicit exclusions.

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