nex_list_browsers

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already marks this as safe, and the description adds valuable behavioral context: it does not start environments and only lists NexBrowser profiles, not OS windows. This goes beyond the annotation by clarifying side-effect-free behavior and scope, though it omits other details like default ordering or pagination.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and scope. Every word earns its place, and the structure is immediately scannable.

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 is insufficient for a 4-parameter list/count tool with no output schema. It does not explain how list vs count is selected, what filters apply to which fields, the return format, pagination behavior, or the meaning of teamId. For a tool in a complex sibling set, this leaves significant gaps.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description carries the burden of explaining parameters like page, size, teamId, and keyword. It mentions none of them. While page/size/keyword are self-explanatory, teamId's role and the interplay between list and count modes remain unexplained, leaving the agent without adequate semantic grounding.

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 uses specific verbs 'List or count' and clearly identifies the resource as 'NexBrowser browser environments.' It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools by stating it does not list OS-level windows and does not start environments, making its scope unambiguous.

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 'without starting them' conveys when to use this tool (for inspecting existing environments) and implicitly contrasts with launch tools like nex_open_browsers. The explicit exclusion of OS windows is a clear non-use case. However, it does not name any alternative tool explicitly, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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