browser_record_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states 'content-free recording state' but doesn't explain what 'recording state' means, whether it's read-only or mutating, or what happens if recording is not active. This is a significant gap for state retrieval.

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 short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. It uses minimal words but could be more informative without losing brevity.

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 that there are no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should provide more context about what the returned recording state looks like (e.g., is it a boolean, a status string?) and how it relates to other recording tools. The description is incomplete for a standalone tool among 34 siblings.

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 input schema has zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage (since there are no params to describe). The description adds clarity by indicating the tool returns 'recording state' but is 'content-free,' which helps set expectations. Since there are no parameters, no additional parameter details 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 says 'Return content-free recording state,' which gives a vague purpose. It mentions 'recording state' but doesn't specify what 'content-free' means or what the tool does with respect to recording, making it unclear how it differs from other browser tools like browser_record_status or browser_record_start.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like browser_record_start or browser_record_stop. The description does not mention any prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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