browser_tabs

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only restates the actions. It does not disclose side effects, error handling (e.g., closing non-existent tab), prerequisites, or return format beyond the schema. The label parameter's 'parallel agent bookkeeping' is a minor addition but insufficient.

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 sentence, concise and front-loaded with key actions. No wasted words, but could be slightly more detailed without losing efficiency.

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 annotations and no output schema, the description is too terse. It lacks details on return values (e.g., what 'list' returns), error handling, or prerequisites (e.g., requires a browser session). For a simple tool, it's minimally adequate but misses important context.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema (e.g., 'parallel agent bookkeeping' for label). The schema already describes parameter purpose adequately.

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 actions (list, create, close) and resource (browser tabs). It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing specifically on tab operations, leaving other browser actions to siblings.

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 implicitly tells when to use the tool (for tab management) via the action list. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternatives like browser_close (which might close the browser) or other tab-related tools, but the context is clear enough.

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