Read Browser Cookies

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true indicates a safe read operation. The description adds behavioral context: 'Cookie values longer than 20 chars are masked for security', which is beyond what annotations provide. Also specifies scope ('from the active browser context'). No contradiction with 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?

The description is short and front-loaded with the purpose. It uses a structured 'Args' section for parameter details. Every sentence adds value, with no unnecessary 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?

The description covers purpose, usage scenario, a key behavioral trait (masking), and parameter semantics. An output schema exists (not shown), so return values need not be detailed. For a simple read tool with two states (with or without domain), this is sufficiently 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 has one optional parameter 'domain' with 0% description coverage. The description clearly explains its effect: 'If set, only cookies matching this domain are returned. If omitted, all cookies are returned.' This adds meaningful guidance beyond the schema.

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 'Read cookies from the active browser context', which is a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('cookies from the active browser context'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like gv_get_page_content (content) and gv_check_session (session/auth status).

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 suggests using the tool 'for debugging sessions or understanding what the site has set', providing clear context. While it does not explicitly exclude alternatives, the sibling list shows no other cookie-reading tool, making the guidance adequate.

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