get_firefox_output

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

The description states the tool is read-only ('Retrieve', 'Returns'), consistent with the readOnlyHint annotation. It adds that output comes from a 'capture file' and includes stderr, crashes, etc., but lacks details on side effects (e.g., does it clear the file?), resource constraints, or prerequisites.

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?

Two concise sentences that first state the tool's purpose in detail, then give a usage recommendation. No wasted words; front-loaded with key information.

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?

The description covers the input parameters adequately and mentions return content type. However, with no output schema, the return format is vague ('recent output') – agents may need to know if it's plain text, JSON, etc. Adequate but not complete.

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% with inline descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds a generic tip ('Use filters') but no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specifies the verb 'Retrieve', the resource 'Firefox output', and details the content type (stdout/stderr including MOZ_LOG, warnings, crashes, stack traces). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools which are all UI or page actions.

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 'Use filters to focus on specific content' implies use of the grep parameter but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. However, the tool is unique among siblings, making its use case straightforward.

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