touch-browser

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states the tool closes a session and cleans up tab state, implying a destructive operation, but lacks details on permissions, reversibility, side effects, or error handling. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('Close a daemon session') and adds necessary detail ('clean up all tab state') without any wasted words. Every part earns its place.

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 the tool's complexity (destructive operation), lack of annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'clean up all tab state' entails, potential impacts, or return values, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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?

There is only one parameter (sessionId), and schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It doesn't add any parameter-specific information, but with zero parameters needing explanation beyond the schema, a baseline of 4 is appropriate as the description doesn't need to cover parameters.

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 clearly states the action ('Close') and target ('a daemon session'), and mentions the effect ('clean up all tab state'), which provides specific purpose. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'tb_tab_close' or 'tb_session_create', which would be needed for a perfect score.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an active session), exclusions, or relationships with siblings like 'tb_session_create' or 'tb_tab_close', leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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