ff_activate_tab

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the tool operates on a real Firefox instance and requires a bridge add-on, but does not detail behavioral effects like tab focus change, potential side effects, or error handling.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no wasted words. The action is stated first, followed by a crucial prerequisite.

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 activation tool with one integer parameter and no output schema, the description provides adequate context (real browser, add-on requirement). Minor omission: no mention of return behavior (likely nothing) or error cases, but acceptable for low complexity.

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 barely adds meaning beyond the schema: it mentions 'by id' but does not specify that 'tabId' should be obtained from ff_list_tabs or similar. The description fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 action ('Focus/switch') and the target ('one of your real tabs by id'), using specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'switch_tab' by specifying it operates on 'REAL running Firefox' with a bridge add-on.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description mentions prerequisites (bridge add-on) but does not specify contexts where ff_activate_tab is preferred over ff_list_tabs or ff_open_tab.

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