browser_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the concrete state dimensions returned, which signals this is a non-mutating introspection tool, but it never states that it is read-only, that it requires an active session, or what happens if no browser is running. Adequate but incomplete for an unannotated tool.

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 leads with the verb and subject and then lists the returned fields compactly. Every clause earns its place with no filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned state fields, which is the main thing an agent needs. For a zero-parameter, zero-risk status tool this is close to complete; only the precondition of an active browser session is unstated.

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 takes zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to document; the schema coverage is 100% and there is nothing for the description to compensate for. Baseline 4 applies for a 0-param schema.

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?

States a specific verb (Show) plus the resource (this session's browser) and enumerates the exact fields returned (id, saved state, allowlist, headless, open tabs, uptime). That distinguishes it from sibling read tools like list_pages and state_list. It stops short of explicitly naming a sibling it is not, so a 4 rather than 5.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no routing to alternatives. The phrase 'this session's browser' implies an inspection context, but the agent must infer that it precedes actions like browser_start or close_page. No exclusions or alternative conditions are stated.

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