browser_context_info

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

Description discloses behavioral nuance about cookies/storage being per-origin with an example (localhost vs 127.0.0.1). In absence of annotations, this effectively communicates the read-only, state-inspecting nature of the tool.

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?

Single sentence that is concise and front-loaded with key information: shared context, tabs, origins, and storage per-origin nuance. Every part earns its place.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, description covers essential aspects: what is described (tabs, origins) and a critical behavioral detail. Minor lack could be mentioning the shared nature explicitly, but overall adequate.

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?

No parameters (0 params), so baseline 4 applies. Description does not need to add parameter info. Schema coverage is 100% as there are no properties.

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?

Description clearly states it describes the shared browser context, listing tabs and origins, and highlights a key nuance about cookies/storage per-origin. This differentiates it from sibling action tools like browser_navigate or browser_close.

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 vs alternatives. Context suggests it's useful before browser actions to understand state, but the description does not state this or mention exclusions.

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