list_allowed

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. 'List' clearly signals a non-mutating read operation, and the description discloses that the output includes both the hosts and a boolean indicating whether all hosts are allowed. It does not detail output format or ordering, but for a parameterless query this is largely sufficient.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that conveys both the primary action and the extra output component with no filler. Every word contributes meaning.

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 the tool's simplicity, zero parameters, and clear read-only purpose, the description is complete enough for an agent to invoke it correctly. The presence of sibling tools like allow_host and disallow_host gives sufficient context for how this fits into host management.

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 zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter meanings. The baseline of 4 applies because the schema is vacuously complete at 100% coverage and no parameter clarifications are needed.

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 states a specific verb, 'List,' and a clear resource, 'hosts the browser may navigate to,' and adds the extra output element, 'whether all hosts are allowed.' This distinguishes it well from siblings like allow_host and disallow_host, which mutate host permissions.

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 implies the tool is used to inspect the current set of allowed hosts, and the naming convention suggests it complements allow_host and disallow_host. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives, nor does it mention any verification workflow.

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