chrome-devtools-mcp-mux

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, confirming this is a mutation tool, which aligns with 'Resizes' implying a change. The description adds that it affects 'the selected page's window', providing context beyond annotations. However, it lacks details on side effects (e.g., if resizing triggers reloads), permissions, or rate limits, leaving behavioral gaps.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without redundancy. It's front-loaded and wastes no words, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 moderate complexity (mutation with 2 parameters), annotations cover safety (readOnlyHint=false), and schema fully documents inputs. However, no output schema exists, and the description doesn't explain return values or error conditions. It's adequate but lacks completeness for a mutation tool without output details.

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%, with clear parameter descriptions for 'width' and 'height'. The description adds that these are 'specified dimensions' for the page, reinforcing the schema but not providing additional meaning like unit details or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles most documentation.

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 action ('Resizes') and target ('the selected page's window'), specifying that it changes dimensions. It distinguishes from siblings like 'take_screenshot' or 'navigate_page' by focusing on window resizing, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from all potential alternatives like 'emulate' which might handle dimensions differently.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a page selected first), exclusions, or compare to siblings like 'emulate' that might also affect page dimensions. Usage is implied but not explicitly defined.

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