vibeside_inspect_storage

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that retrieval is bounded (limits) and that credential masking is an available behavior, but it never states that the tool is strictly read-only/non-mutating of the page, nor how much data or how many domains are returned.

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 front-loaded sentence that leads with the verb and resources before the trailing capability list. No filler, though the feature list is dense and could have been trimmed in favor of routing guidance.

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?

Five optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations mean the description has to cover a lot. It covers what can be inspected and the key knobs, but says nothing about result shape, ordering, or the fact that masking is off by default — a point where 'credential masking' could mislead an agent into assuming credentials are always hidden.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the five parameters are already fully documented, including defaults like maskSensitive=false and limit=50. The description echoes three of these behaviors (JSON parsing, bounding limits, credential masking) but adds no syntax, format, or precedence 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 ('Inspect') and an exhaustive resource list (cookies, localStorage, sessionStorage, IndexedDB) scoped to 'the active dev page'. It reads clearly against the mutating sibling vibeside_mutate_storage, though it never names that alternative explicitly.

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?

No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance is given. The read-only intent is only implied by the verb 'Inspect'; nothing tells the agent to prefer this over vibeside_mutate_storage or a DOM-inspection sibling.

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