tabs_select

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing beyond the one-line action. It doesn't say what happens if the tab isn't found, whether the switch persists for later tool calls, or whether any permissions/state are involved.

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 with no filler; it is efficient rather than verbose. The brevity is under-specification rather than wasted text, but the structure itself is clean.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented required parameter, the description should at minimum identify the identifier format and the effect on tab state. Neither is present, leaving the agent to guess how to invoke it 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?

Only one parameter with 0% schema coverage, and the description never explains what the 'tab' string should contain (ID, URL, title, or index). With low coverage the description is expected to compensate for the schema, and it does not.

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 concrete action (bring to front) on a concrete resource (a tab), which is distinguishable from siblings like tabs_list, tabs_create, and tabs_close. It stops short of 5 because 'the front' is slightly colloquial and the description doesn't clarify whether this activates the tab for the browser or for subsequent tool calls.

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 on when to use this rather than alternatives, and no prerequisite stated (e.g., that the tab must already exist or that an identifier typically comes from tabs_list). The agent must infer the entire call context.

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