Browser Profiles

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does real work: it defines a profile as a Chrome user-data directory whose cookies, localStorage, and login state survive across separate MCP server runs, contrasting it with a session that is wiped. It does not state whether 'delete' is irreversible, what happens to a profile in active use, or error behavior for a missing name.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the definition, then the creation path. Every sentence adds distinct information an agent needs and none is redundant with the schema.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, resource semantics, and the creation path. It leaves the shape of the 'list' result (e.g., profile names) implicit, which is a minor gap given the simplicity.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds value beyond the schema: the profile-name character constraint (letters, digits, dash, underscore) appears nowhere in the schema, and it reinforces that name is required for 'delete'.

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 states a specific pair of verbs (list/delete) against a clearly named resource (named persistent browser profiles) and defines the resource itself. It implicitly distinguishes itself from browser_navigate by explaining that profile creation happens there, not here.

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?

It gives clear routing guidance: manage profiles here, but create one by passing `profile: "name"` to browser_navigate on a new session. There's no explicit statement of when NOT to use it, but the create-vs-manage split is unambiguous.

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