Open page

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

Annotations already cover readOnly and openWorld, but the description adds real substance: it runs under the student session, returns a composite payload including captured JSON API calls, and actively blocks tracking requests with a blockedRequests list. Those are behavioral traits the annotations cannot express.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the return shape and the tracking-block caveat. No filler, though the 'Advanced:' qualifier could have been expanded into an actual usage condition rather than a bare label.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so by enumerating text, links, iframes, API calls and blockedRequests. Parameters are fully covered in schema, so the only gap is guidance on when this beats sibling tools.

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 100% and the url parameter's default (portal home) and saveCaptures' privacy warning are documented there. The description only implies that 'url' is a platform URL, adding little beyond the schema, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('open a platform URL') and specifies what comes back (text, links, iframes, JSON API calls). The 'Advanced:' prefix signals it is a lower-level fallback relative to siblings like click or api_get, though it never names those alternatives.

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?

'Advanced:' implies it is a reserve tool for cases where simpler tools fail, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use condition is stated and no sibling is named. An agent must infer the routing from the prefix alone.

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