browser_tabs

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

Annotations already carry readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=true. The description's mention of 'close' aligns with the destructive hint, but it adds no extra behavioral context such as side effects of selecting a tab or irreversibility of close. No contradiction exists, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the key operations. Every word contributes meaning, and there is no filler or redundant restatement of the annotations or title.

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 3-parameter tool with full schema coverage, the description captures all supported operations and the schema fills in parameter specifics. It does not describe what 'list' returns and gives no guidance on when to use this tool, but the core invocation information is present.

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 100%, and the schema already documents url, index, and the action enum with clear meanings. The tool description does not add parameter details, so it earns the baseline 3 for relying on the schema.

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 lists four concrete operations ('List, create, close, or select') applied to a clear resource ('browser tab'), so an agent can tell the tool manages tabs. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like browser_navigate or browser_close, so it misses the top score for sibling differentiation.

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 given about when to use browser_tabs versus sibling tools such as browser_navigate, browser_close, or browser_find. The action enum implies some usage, but the description itself provides no context or exclusions.

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