okta-browser-session-proof

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool opens/reuses a browser, authenticates, and publishes proofs every 5 minutes. However, it does not explain what 'redacted cookie proofs' are, whether the tool blocks or runs asynchronously, or side effects on existing sessions. Partially transparent but missing key behavioral details.

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 sentence of about 30 words, front-loaded with action and outcome. It conveys essential information without redundancy. Could be slightly restructured for readability, but overall concise and efficient.

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 tool managing a live session with periodic proof publication, the description lacks details on output (what does 'publish proofs' mean? Where do they go?), return values, and asynchronous behavior. Also no mention of side effects. Given no output schema and moderate complexity, the description is incomplete but minimally adequate.

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 67% (authorized and tenantConfirmation documented, timeoutSeconds not). The tool description adds context: 'authenticate to the configured tenant' maps to tenantConfirmation, and 'authorized disposable lab' maps to authorized. But timeoutSeconds is not explained, and the description does not clarify that it controls session max duration. Baseline score due to partial compensation.

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 tool opens or reuses an isolated browser, authenticates, and periodically publishes cookie proofs. It distinguishes from siblings like okta-browser-snapshot and okta-browser-harvest-tokens, though not explicitly from okta-browser-refresh-proof. The verb 'open or reuse' is specific, making the purpose clear.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it's for establishing a session with ongoing proof publication, but does not state when not to use it (e.g., for one-time snapshots) or prerequisites. Lacks 'when-to-use' or 'when-not-to-use' context.

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