nex_browser_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint: true, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context by specifying what the tool lists and what it explicitly never reports. This goes beyond the annotation, providing clarity on scope without contradicting the read-only hint.

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, efficiently front-loaded with the tool's preferred status and primary purpose, followed by necessary exclusions. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

Despite having no output schema and a simple parameter set, the description clearly communicates what the tool does and what it excludes, which is sufficient for a list operation. It does not describe return format, but the core purpose and constraints are well covered.

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 description coverage is only 20% (only groupId has a description), and the tool description adds no explanation of page, size, teamId, or keyword parameters. The description does not compensate for the schema's limited information, leaving agents to guess parameter semantics.

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 tool 'lists managed NexBrowser environments/profiles' and uses a specific verb 'lists' with a resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly excluding other browser types and tabs, and positions itself as the preferred tool for showing/counting windows.

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 context for when to use the tool ('Preferred NexBrowser OpenAPI tool for requests such as...') and outlines explicit exclusions (never reports Chrome, Edge, Codex in-app browser, OS windows, or tabs). It doesn't name alternative tools directly, but the behavioral scope suffices to guide selection.

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