Set Browser Geolocation

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: it warns that coordinates are exposed to authorized pages (sensitivity), specifies that only intended coordinates should be supplied, and outlines preconditions and next steps. This complements the destructiveHint and openWorldHint annotations without contradiction.

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 extremely concise: four sentences, each serving a distinct purpose (purpose, precondition, next step, sensitivity). It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and requires no editing.

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 the tool's complexity (4 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers the essential aspects: when to use, preconditions, post-conditions, and a security warning. It does not explain error handling or alternative approaches, but the provided information is sufficient for correct invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining the role of latitude, longitude, and accuracy as 'controlled' values, and specifically notes that acknowledgeLocationAccess must be true. It does not detail each parameter's format (schema handles that), but adds meaning by connecting parameters to the use case and precondition.

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's purpose: setting browser geolocation for authorized tests. It uses specific verbs ('set'), resource ('geolocation'), and context ('full-profile authorized test'), distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle navigation, permissions, or other browser actions.

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 the tool (when a test depends on controlled geolocation) and provides preconditions (acknowledgeLocationAccess: true) and next steps (reload or exercise behavior). It does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternative tools, but the guidance is clear and actionable.

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