arc_switch_tab

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

No annotations provided. The description does not disclose behavioral details like what happens if the tab does not exist, whether it fails silently, or if it requires the tab to be in the same space. The tool's simplicity reduces risk, but more context would be beneficial.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the core action. It is concise but could be expanded to include usage notes without becoming verbose.

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 tool's simplicity (two optional parameters, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks contextual notes on behavior (e.g., priority between tab_index and url) and typical use cases.

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% with descriptions for each parameter (tab_index and url). The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema already documents parameter purpose adequately.

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?

Description clearly states the tool's action: switching to a specified tab. The Japanese phrase '指定したタブに切り替える' directly conveys the purpose. It distinguishes from sibling tools like arc_list_tabs (listing) or arc_get_active_tab (retrieving info).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as arc_search_tabs, arc_focus_space, or arc_get_active_tab. The agent is left to infer when to use a tab index vs URL.

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