touch-browser

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states it 'returns' data, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it requires authentication, has rate limits, returns real-time vs. cached data, or what format the summary takes. The description is minimal and lacks crucial operational context.

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 directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse. Every word 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 no annotations, no output schema, and a read operation with potential complexity (telemetry summary), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'aggregated' entails, what data is included, the return format, or any dependencies. For a tool that likely returns structured data, more context is needed to use it effectively.

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 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (though empty). The description adds no parameter details, which is appropriate here. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, as there's nothing to document and no schema gaps to compensate for.

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 ('return') and resource ('aggregated pilot telemetry summary'), specifying it's for the 'current runtime'. It distinguishes from sibling 'tb_telemetry_recent' by focusing on aggregated summary rather than recent data. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with other siblings beyond the telemetry domain.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description implies usage for getting telemetry summary, but doesn't specify prerequisites, timing, or contrast with other telemetry or data retrieval tools like 'tb_telemetry_recent' or 'tb_status'.

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