browser_start

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the profile copying behavior but omits details on headless mode, default visibility, multiple instances, and return values. This is partially transparent.

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 concise sentence that efficiently communicates the core action and key parameter usage. No filler or redundancy.

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 is too brief for a launch operation. It lacks details on return values, error conditions, prerequisites (e.g., Firefox installation), and headless behavior. Given no output schema, it should provide more context for reliable agent use.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description adds context for the 'useProfile' parameter (profile name or default for cookies copy). The 'headless' parameter is not explained, leaving it ambiguous. The description partially compensates for missing schema descriptions.

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 'Launch the live Firefox instance,' specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like close_browser, open_tab, etc., which handle different stages of browser interaction.

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 implies this tool is used to start a browser session, and it provides guidance on the useProfile parameter (copy vs clean). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare it to alternatives like ff_navigate or open_tab.

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