get_browser_tabs

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. The verb 'Retrieves' implies a read-only operation, and the description specifies the data types returned (titles and URLs). However, it does not mention edge cases such as browser unavailability or empty results, nor does it explicitly state non-destructiveness.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that directly states the purpose and scope. Every word earns its place, with no redundant qualifiers or 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?

For a simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It tells the agent what will be retrieved (titles and URLs) and the browser options. The lack of an output schema might make the exact response format unclear, but given the low complexity, the description is adequate for selection and basic invocation.

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 already provides a description for the 'browser' parameter ('Which browser tabs to fetch') and a default value of 'both'. The tool description does not add additional semantic detail beyond restating the available options. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieves') and identifies the exact resource ('all open browser tab titles and URLs') along with the scope ('from Safari, Chrome, or both'). This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like open_browser_url, which opens URLs rather than retrieving tabs.

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 makes it clear when to use this tool: when you need to fetch browser tab information. It explicitly names the included browsers and the 'both' option, but does not mention alternatives or exclusions. Since no direct sibling performs a similar function, this is adequate.

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