browser_cookies

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

With no annotations, the description discloses all key behaviors: read (get), write (set), and delete (clear). It notes that clear removes all cookies and set requires name/value. No side effects or permissions are mentioned, but the actions are clearly defined. The description covers the essential traits beyond what the schema provides.

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 concise (3 sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, supported actions, output details, and practical use case (debugging auth). No redundant phrases.

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 params, nested object) and no output schema, the description explains return values for 'get' action. For 'clear' and 'set', returns are implicit. The description is sufficient for a cookie management tool among many browser siblings. A complete description would mention return format for all actions, but the current one is adequate.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context: e.g., 'name filters when action=get', 'action default is get', 'cookie object required for set'. This provides meaningful usage hints beyond the schema, justifying a 4.

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: viewing and managing browser cookies with actions get, set, clear. It specifies what it does (get all cookies, filter by domain, set, clear) and the output (total count and details). This distinguishes it from sibling browser tools like browser_storage.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The description implies usage for cookie management but does not differentiate from siblings like browser_storage or other cookie-related tools. The agent must infer context from the sibling list.

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