vibeside_connect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral context. It usefully discloses that the connection uses existing sessions and cookies and supports ports like 9315 and 9222. It does not state prerequisites such as remote debugging being enabled, exclusivity of the connection, or failure/error behavior.

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?

A single well-formed sentence with the core action front-loaded and no filler. The parenthetical port examples are compact and relevant.

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 one-optional-parameter connect tool with no output schema, the description covers target browsers, CDP transport, and session/cookie preservation. With no annotations, it should still mention prerequisites like enabling remote debugging or whether it fails if no browser is found.

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 cdpUrl parameter is already documented as defaulting to auto-detected local ports. The description adds useful port examples, but does not add format or syntax detail 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?

States a specific verb (connect) and resource (Chrome/Edge browser via CDP), with browser types and port examples. "Existing or active" implies it attaches to a running browser rather than launching one, but it does not explicitly name the sibling launch tool.

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 phrase "existing or active" gives implicit guidance to use this only when a browser is already running. However, it does not explicitly contrast with vibeside_spawn_browser, vibeside_browser_status, or other sibling tools, so selection still requires inference.

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