analyze_browser_history

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'fastest' for 'quick_summary' and 'limits analysis for faster processing' for 'fast_mode', which adds some performance context. However, it lacks critical details like whether this is a read-only or mutating operation, any authentication needs, rate limits, or what 'not yet implemented' means for 'basic' analysis. The description does not contradict annotations, but it is insufficient for a tool with potential behavioral complexities.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, starting with the main purpose and then detailing parameters in a structured list. Every sentence adds value, such as clarifying analysis types and defaults, with no redundant information. It could be slightly more concise by integrating the 'Step 3' context more smoothly, but overall it is well-structured and efficient.

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 3 parameters with 0% schema coverage and no annotations, the description does a good job explaining parameters and usage context. However, with an output schema present, it need not explain return values, but it still lacks details on behavioral aspects like safety, permissions, or error handling. For a tool that performs analysis (potentially resource-intensive), this leaves gaps in completeness, though it meets minimum viable standards.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds significant meaning beyond the schema by explaining each parameter: 'time_period_in_days' as 'Number of days of history to analyze', 'analysis_type' with detailed options and their effects (e.g., 'Basic stats only' for 'quick_summary'), and 'fast_mode' as 'limits analysis for faster processing'. This effectively documents all 3 parameters, though it could provide more on default behaviors or constraints.

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 states the tool 'analyzes browser history with different levels of detail' and 'consolidates all analysis options', which gives a general purpose but lacks specificity about what resources or data it operates on. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_browser_history' (retrieval) and 'search_browser_history' (searching), but the purpose remains somewhat vague without concrete examples of what 'analysis' entails.

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 provides clear context by positioning this as 'Step 3' and 'the main analysis tool', implying a sequence or primary role among siblings. It distinguishes from alternatives by noting 'consolidates all analysis options', suggesting it's comprehensive, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name specific alternatives among the siblings.

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