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 explicitly mentions destructive side effects (discards unsaved changes, clears dynamic DOM), prerequisites (active Chrome tab), and the return value (reload confirmation). This is thorough and leaves nothing hidden.

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 main action, then covers side effects, prerequisites, return, usage, and alternatives in a logical order. Each sentence adds unique value without redundancy, and the total length is appropriate for the information conveyed.

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 with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: what it does, side effects, prerequisites, return type, usage scenarios, and alternatives. Nothing essential is missing.

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 schema provides full descriptions for both parameters (tab_id and instance_id) with 100% coverage, so the description doesn't need to add more. The baseline of 3 is appropriate because the description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what the schema already explains, but the schema fully documents them.

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 states a specific verb (reload) and resource (current page), and adds context by noting it discards unsaved changes and re-fetches resources. It explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings by naming navigate (for different URL) and pause_on_load (for debugging reload), so an agent can clearly tell it apart.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use this to refresh page content or reset to initial load state.' It also names alternatives with conditions ('navigate' to load a different URL, 'pause_on_load' to debug reload execution) and states a prerequisite (requires an active Chrome tab). This is complete usage guidance.

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