vibeside_switch_tab

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not state what happens when no tab matches a pattern, when several match, or when no parameter is given at all (all four are optional), and there is no note on connection prerequisites or side effects on focus.

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 that front-loads the action and then enumerates the selector options. Nothing is wasted or buried.

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 simple switch tool the description plus schema is enough to invoke it in the common case, but with no annotations, no output schema, and all parameters optional, the ambiguity around missing/ambiguous selectors and matching behavior is left unresolved.

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 schema already documents all four parameters, and the description simply restates those same selectors (including the zero-based index). It adds no matching semantics, precedence rules, or format details beyond what the schema provides.

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 ('Switch') and resource ('the active tab') and enumerates the four selector strategies (index, ID, URL pattern, title pattern). The verb alone separates it from siblings like list_tabs, new_tab, and close_tab, though no sibling is named 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?

The description lists the four ways to select a tab, which implicitly frames when each selector applies, but gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or any instruction on which selector takes precedence if multiple are supplied. No reference to alternatives such as list_tabs or new_tab.

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