Attach to Chromium

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

Annotations indicate no destructive or read-only behavior, but the description adds crucial context: 'attaching exposes the live browser context and any data visible in the selected tab.' This goes beyond annotations and informs the agent of side effects and authorization needs.

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 three sentences with clear structure: use case, prerequisites/next steps, and sensitivity warning. No redundant information, though the sensitivity sentence could be integrated but remains efficient.

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 6 parameters and 0% schema coverage, the description covers the core purpose, selection criteria, and important behavioral notes. It references an output schema so return values are handled. Missing minor details like the format of cdpUrl, but overall sufficient for agent decision-making.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions several selection parameters (pageId, urlContains, titleContains, targetIndex) and the required cdpUrl, but does not explain the 'activate' parameter. Partial coverage, not fully compensating for the schema gap.

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 verb 'attach' and the resource 'Chromium page'. It specifies that it connects to an already-running instance and selects a tab by various criteria, distinguishing it from sibling tools like browser_launch and browser_switch_tab.

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 explicitly states when to use (already-running Chromium with a page to diagnose) and provides preconditions (authorized CDP endpoint) and next steps (confirm with browser_get_state). It does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use, 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.