Warm up browser session

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds value by disclosing the actual behavior (launching a browser, navigating to a specific URL) and the return value (current LinkedIn URL and success flag). This goes beyond what the annotations provide, though it does not cover failure modes or side effects beyond the read-only guarantee.

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-loaded with the action, and then a usage note. Every word earns its place. No fluff.

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?

For a simple zero-param tool with good annotations and an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage context, and return value. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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?

No parameters exist (schema coverage 100% and param count 0). The baseline for zero-param tools is 4, and the description correctly makes no parameter claims. Nothing to add.

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 specific actions: 'Launch the browser, navigate to /feed/, confirm authentication.' This distinguishes it from siblings like session_status (which likely only checks status) and session_logout (which ends the session). The verb 'warm up' is clarified with concrete steps.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call this after --login to verify the session works before running other tools.' It does not explicitly mention when not to use or name alternative tools, but the context is clear enough for an agent to sequence this correctly.

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