Start a browser profile

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

Despite annotations already signaling mutation (readOnlyHint false), the description adds significant operational context: it requires a running desktop app, automation is unavailable on the Free plan with HTTP 402, and stop_profile syncs the data directory back to cloud. It also warns that a new profile lacks the original's cookies, logins, or history.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and organized into three dense paragraphs. Every sentence earns its place: purpose, exclusion, workflow, and prerequisite. There is no filler or repetition of schema-only details.

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?

Despite having 11 parameters and no output schema, the description provides enough context for correct invocation: what the tool does, when to use it, how to avoid confusion with create_profile, how to chain automation/stop_profile, and the required runtime environment. This is highly complete for a tool of this 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?

The input schema already documents 82% of parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds cross-parameter guidance on choosing between `name` and `browserProfileId` and clarifies that `name` is resolved to an id while warning against creating a new profile for a user-given name. This is useful semantics beyond the individual schema entries.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Launch an EXISTING browser profile' and explicitly maps the tool to natural-language requests like 'open/run/spin up <profile>'. It differentiates itself from create_profile by warning 'Never route a named profile to create_profile', making the tool's unique role clear.

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 when-to-use guidance ('the tool for open/run/spin up <profile>'), an explicit exclusion ('Never route a named profile to create_profile'), and a workflow ('Pass automation: true ... then stop_profile'). It also states the prerequisite that the Dolphin{anty} desktop app must be running.

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