spawn_play_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It lists the output fields (open status, URL, headed mode, recent error count) but does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, has no side effects, or whether it requires an existing session. This leaves key behavioral expectations unstated.

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 concise fragment that front-loads the key output dimensions. Every word adds information, and there is no redundancy or filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description adequately lists several return values (open status, URL, headed mode, recent error count). It does not mention error cases or define what a 'play browser session' is, but given the sibling tool names, the context is likely clear. It is sufficiently complete for a simple status query.

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 baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics, and the empty schema fully covers the input. No deduction needed.

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 indicates this tool reports the status of a play browser session (open/closed, URL, headed mode, recent error count). It distinguishes itself from the general spawn_status and the other play_* action tools by specifying 'play browser session' as the resource.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives like spawn_status or spawn_play_open. The description implies it is for checking session state, but it does not state prerequisites, exclusions, or how it differs from other status/play tools.

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