manage_tabs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and mostly delivers: it discloses that 'list' returns index/url/title, that 'open' optionally navigates to a URL, and that 'switch' uses a previously returned index. It does not warn about side effects of 'close_active,' but the action names and parameter notes make behavior predictable.

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 purpose is captured in a single sentence followed by a compact Args list. There is no filler or redundancy; every line contributes operational detail.

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?

The description covers the full action space and all parameters, including the list-before-switch dependency, which is enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly. It omits edge cases like errors when no browser is open or when no tab is active, but those are not documented for sibling tools either.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description fully compensates by explaining every parameter: each action enum value, url with 'open,' tab_index with 'switch,' and switch_to with 'open.' This adds meaning well beyond the raw schema.

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 phrase, 'List, open, switch between, or close browser tabs,' identifying the resource and enumerating the exact action set. This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like navigate or close_browser by focusing on tab-level operations.

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 workflow guidance, such as calling 'list' before 'switch' to find the right tab_index, and specifies which parameters apply to which actions. It does not name sibling alternatives or exclusion conditions, so it stops short of a full when-to-use comparison.

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