reload

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes key behavioral traits: it's destructive ('discarding all unsaved changes'), has side effects ('clears dynamic DOM state'), specifies prerequisites ('requires an active Chrome tab'), and mentions return values ('reload confirmation'). This covers critical aspects like state loss and operational requirements.

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 front-loaded with the core action ('Reloads the current page') and efficiently uses each sentence to add value: it explains consequences, prerequisites, returns, usage, and alternatives. There is no wasted text, making it highly concise and well-structured for quick understanding.

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 complexity (destructive operation with prerequisites) and the absence of annotations and output schema, the description provides complete context. It covers purpose, behavioral effects, prerequisites, return indication, usage scenarios, and sibling differentiation, ensuring the agent has all necessary information to invoke the tool correctly.

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 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately does not discuss parameters, maintaining focus on tool behavior. A baseline of 4 is applied since there are no parameters to document, and the description adds value elsewhere without unnecessary details.

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 explicitly states the tool's function as 'Reloads the current page', which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from siblings by mentioning alternatives like 'navigate' and 'pause_on_load', clearly indicating its unique role in refreshing page content rather than navigating to a new URL or debugging.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool ('to refresh page content or reset to initial load state') and when not to use it by naming alternatives ('navigate' to load a different URL, 'pause_on_load' to debug reload execution'). This offers clear context for selection among sibling tools.

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