browser_responsive_test

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

描述说明了核心行为（打开URL、截图、返回截图和差异分析），但未披露副作用（如是否修改浏览器状态、是否需要会话、是否关闭标签页）、输出格式细节，且没有注释提供额外信息。对于无注释的工具，描述承担全责，但仍不够全面。

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?

描述仅两句话，第一句点明目的，第二句说明操作和结果，简洁无冗余，信息呈递高效。

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?

工具参数完整且有schema描述，但无输出schema，描述未说明差异分析的具体形式（文本还是图像）、是否依赖浏览器会话、以及前置条件。对于多视口对比这类复杂操作，信息不够完整。

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?

输入schema覆盖100%，参数描述已包含各参数含义，描述没有补充超出schema的信息。符合基线3。

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?

描述明确说明工具用于模拟多视口截图对比以检测响应式布局问题，动词明确（模拟、截图对比、检测），资源明确（响应式布局），与兄弟工具无重复，因为其他工具不提供多视口比较。

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?

描述隐含用于响应式测试场景，但未明确说明何时使用此工具而非其他截图工具（如browser_screenshot）或设备模拟工具（browser_emulate_device），也没有提供何时不使用或替代方案。

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