Detach trusted CDP input

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains the transformation (input returns to content-script path) and a notable nuance about finalize_tabs and kept claims. It doesn't mention preconditions like whether the tab must be claimed, or failure states, but the core behavior is transparent.

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?

Two terse sentences. The first gets straight to the action; the second adds necessary sibling context without redundancy. No filler, and the key concept is front-loaded.

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?

The tool has no annotations and no output schema, so the description must supply most of the context. It is thin on parameters, prerequisites, return values, failure behavior, and assumes prior knowledge of internal concepts like 'trusted CDP input', 'claimed tab', and 'finalize claims'.

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 0% and the description never mentions tabId or sessionTabId. 'Claimed tab' hints at tabId's role, but sessionTabId is entirely unexplained, and there is no guidance on which parameter is needed or how they interact.

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 clear verb ('Detach'), resource ('trusted CDP input'), and effect ('return click/type/keypress to the content-script path'). It also names sibling detaching tools, helping distinguish them, though it doesn't articulate the exact selection difference between them.

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 implies when this tool is relevant (when detaching trusted CDP input while preserving the content-script path) and notes that release_tab and finalize_tabs also detach. However, it gives no explicit conditions for choosing one over the other, nor any 'when not to use' guidance.

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