get_console_logs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states that logs are returned from the browser console and are Chrome-specific. It does not mention side effects (likely none) or scope (current page or entire session), but for a simple read operation, the information is adequate.

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 sentence of 9 words, efficiently conveying the key action and constraints. It front-loads the main purpose ('Return browser console logs') and then adds specifics. No wasted words.

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 captures the core behavior. However, it omits detail about the scope of logs (current page vs. session) and doesn't describe how the level parameter works, which would improve completeness.

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 description does not mention the only parameter 'level', which filters by log severity. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but fails to do so. The parameter is simple, but the lack of any mention means zero added value beyond the schema enum itself.

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 clearly states the verb (return), resource (browser console logs), and specifies the types of logs (errors, warnings, info) and a browser restriction (Chrome only). This distinguishes it from similar sibling tools like get_network_logs.

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 explicitly mentions 'Chrome only' as a usage constraint, which is helpful. However, it does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_network_logs or get_session_log, nor does it clarify the context (e.g., current page logs).

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