browser_resize

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations. Annotations declare destructiveHint: true, but the description does not explain what 'destructive' means (e.g., it may break existing page layout or affect viewport). The agent is left to infer behavior from the name alone.

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 with no superfluous words. It is front-loaded and efficient, which is optimal for a simple tool.

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 simplicity (no output schema, two simple numeric params), the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks mention of return value or side effects (e.g., whether the window resizing triggers events or is synchronous). For complete guidance, more detail would be needed.

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 both parameters described as 'Width/Height of the browser window'. The description does not add extra meaning such as units (pixels?), valid ranges, or that both parameters are required. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema already documents parameters 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 tool resizes the browser window, using a specific verb+resource. While it does not distinguish from sibling tools, no sibling performs resizing, so differentiation is unnecessary. However, it lacks specificity about what 'resize' means (e.g., does it set exact dimensions or relative adjustment?).

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. For example, it doesn't mention that resizing might be needed before screenshotting or that other tools like browser_navigate depend on window size. No exclusions or context are given.

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