browser_resize

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It fails to mention that the resize affects the current session's viewport, whether it is reversible, or any side effects on layout. In fact, it provides no information beyond the tool's name, leaving the agent completely uninformed about operational semantics.

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 maximally concise, containing a single straightforward sentence. It is front-loaded and efficient, though it borders on under-specification due to the lack of any additional context. Still, for a simple tool, the brevity is not excessive.

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 simplicity of the tool (three scalar parameters, no output schema), the description might seem sufficient, but the absence of annotations and any contextual details (e.g., how sessionId is used, whether the resize is sticky across navigations) leaves it incomplete for an agent to invoke correctly with confidence.

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% with parameter descriptions that align with the schema. The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate. It neither clarifies the sessionId parameter nor explains how width and height are applied.

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 'Resize the browser window' uses a specific verb ('resize') and resource ('browser window'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools that handle navigation, clicking, 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, when not to use it, or any prerequisites. The description simply states the action without contextual hints about appropriate use cases or limitations.

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