Browser Cookies

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool mutates state via set/delete/clear and frames the cleanup use case, but says nothing about the scope of clear (current page vs all domains), auth/permission needs, or reversibility of destructive actions. Adequate but materially incomplete for a mutation tool.

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 sentences, zero waste, with the capability statement front-loaded and the use cases following. Every clause earns its place.

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?

For a 10-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers intent well but omits the return shape of get, the meaning of mode/sessionId selection, and the blast radius of clear. It is workable but leaves gaps an agent must infer.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 10 parameters including enums and per-action requirements. The description adds no syntax, defaults, or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb set (get, set, delete, clear) plus resource (cookies on the current page), which is precise enough for an agent to act. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling browser_storage, which handles a related but distinct resource, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Gives three concrete usage scenarios (inspect auth/session cookies, inject a saved session to skip login, clean up before fresh testing), which is strong context for when to reach for this tool. It offers no exclusions or named alternatives (e.g., browser_storage or browser_auth), so it is clear but not complete.

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