toggle_display

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that switching to headed/virtual mode shows the browser window and includes a vncUrl for interaction, and that the response contains a tabsInvalidated field indicating whether tabs need recreation. This provides transparency beyond a mere toggle action.

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 three sentences, efficiently covering purpose, usage, and response behavior. It is front-loaded with the main action and provides necessary details without wordiness. A slight reduction in length could be possible, but current structure is clear and functional.

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 simplicity (toggling display mode), the description is fairly complete. It explains the two main use cases (CAPTCHA, resolution), and decodes response fields (vncUrl, tabsInvalidated). It lacks error handling or edge cases like permission errors, but for a toggle tool with two parameters, it covers essential aspects.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds value by explaining the effect of headless values (false→headed, true→headless, virtual→virtual display) and mentions response behaviors (vncUrl, tabsInvalidated) that are not in the schema, enriching 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 explicitly states the tool toggles browser display mode between headless and headed, which is a specific verb-resource pair. It also mentions the virtual mode from the schema. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that perform other browser actions like clicking, scrolling, or navigation.

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 clear usage guidance: use headed mode when encountering CAPTCHAs or issues requiring visual interaction, and switch back to headless after resolving. It also explains how to handle the response (vncUrl, tabsInvalidated). While it doesn't explicitly list when-not-to-use, the context is sufficient.

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