browser_switch_page

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

With no annotations, the description must fully explain behavioral traits. It only mentions 'switch' without disclosing side effects (e.g., whether the current page context changes for subsequent tools), return behavior, index-base semantics, or error conditions. This is insufficient for a safe tool invocation.

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 with no wasted words, making it concise. However, it is so brief that it borders on under-specification, yet for the purpose of conciseness, it earns a high score for avoiding irrelevant content.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity, the description fails to provide adequate context. It does not explain how the index relates to the tab list from sibling tools, the impact on subsequent actions, or the role of task_id in multi-session scenarios. The absence of an output schema and any behavioral details leaves the tool incomplete for an agent to use safely.

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 0%, and the description adds no meaning to the parameters. The 'index' parameter is not explained (e.g., zero-based or one-based), and 'task_id' is ignored entirely. The description does not compensate for the bare schema, so the agent lacks critical parameter understanding.

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's function: switching to the tab at a specified index. It distinguishes from siblings like browser_navigate (which navigates to a URL) and browser_list_pages (which lists pages). The verb 'switch' and resource 'tab page' are specific.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as browser_navigate or browser_list_pages. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or preferred contexts, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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