interceptor_browser_launch

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses behavioral aspects: launching with proxy and SPKI trust, source-level fingerprint patches, humanize mode, and Playwright driving. However, it lacks details on side effects, prerequisites (e.g., proxy setup), error conditions, or return value.

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 exceptionally concise: two sentences (40 words) with no filler. Every word adds value: first sentence states purpose and key features, second clarifies technical driver and subsequent tool usage. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description should cover return values and setup dependencies. It mentions Playwright and locator tools but does not specify what the tool returns (e.g., browser session ID) or prerequisites (e.g., proxy configuration). This is adequate but has clear gaps.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for all 8 parameters, each with defaults and one enum. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'launch[es] cloakbrowser (stealth Chromium)' with specific features (proxy flags, SPKI trust, fingerprint patches, humanize mode). It differentiates from sibling tools like interceptor_camoufox_launch by specifying the browser type and mentioning Playwright-driven locator tools.

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 the tool is for launching a stealth browser for tasks requiring fingerprint protection and humanization, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., interceptor_camoufox_launch) or mention scenarios where it should not be used.

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