Show the signed-in account

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond those annotations: it reports whether the browser is reachable and distinguishes signed-out from not-running states. This is meaningful operational context that the annotations do not provide.

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 short, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence earns its place. The second sentence adds diagnostic guidance without redundancy.

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?

For a zero-parameter read-only health/identity check, the description fully covers what the tool does, when to use it, and what diagnostic distinctions it provides. No output schema exists, but the tool's simple nature means return-value details are not essential.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema fully covers its interface. Baseline for zero parameters is 4; the description appropriately focuses on behavior and usage rather than parameter details.

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 states a specific verb ('Report') and resource ('signed-in account'), and adds browser reachability as an explicit secondary purpose. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools, none of which report account identity or connection status.

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 says this is 'the first thing to call when something is not working' and explains that it separates three distinct failure modes. This gives the agent concrete, actionable guidance on when to invoke it and what diagnostic value it provides.

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