Export cookies from a profile

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, including the requirement for cloud sync, paid plan status, and the empty array return behavior for never-synced profiles. It also clarifies that no desktop app is required, which is not disclosed by annotations. This is rich, useful context.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and method. Every sentence adds value: the first explains what and how, the second covers prerequisites and an edge case. No redundant or filler content.

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 read tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose, prerequisites, and return behavior (empty array). It doesn't describe the cookie format, but for this type of tool that's not critical. The sibling context differentiates the tool adequately. A small gap is the lack of explicit error conditions (e.g., if cloud sync is disabled), but overall it is sufficiently complete.

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 50%, with only browserProfilePassword having a description. The tool description does not elaborate on the parameters. However, the parameter names are self-explanatory ('browserProfileId', 'browserProfilePassword'), and 'password only if profile is password-protected' is provided in the schema. The description adds no extra parameter semantics, so a baseline score 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 clearly states the tool reads a profile's cookies via the remote sync API, which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like export_cookies_local by explicitly mentioning 'remote sync API' and 'no desktop app required', making its purpose unambiguous.

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?

It provides clear conditions for use: profile must have cloud sync enabled and it is a paid-plan feature. It also notes that an empty array is returned if the profile has never synced. While it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools like export_cookies_local, the 'remote sync API' implies when this tool is appropriate, and the prerequisites serve as usage guidance.

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