get_storage

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses key behaviors: it includes HttpOnly cookies (usually inaccessible) and mentions that large values are truncated. This is valuable transparency. No side effects are described, but as a read operation, this is sufficient.

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 two sentences, front-loading the action, and every sentence provides necessary information. There is no redundancy or verbosity.

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?

Given no output schema, the description explains what the tool retrieves and notes truncation. However, it does not specify the return format (e.g., separate objects per storage type). Still, it is complete enough for an agent to understand its purpose and usage.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (empty). Per guidelines, a baseline of 4 is appropriate. The description adds no parameter details because none exist, and it correctly focuses on what the tool retrieves.

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 starts with 'Get' and explicitly lists the resources: localStorage, sessionStorage, and cookies. It clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like get_network_requests or query_dom, which serve different purposes.

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 states it is 'useful for debugging auth/session state,' providing clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternative tools.

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