configure_session

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It reveals the dual view/set behavior, what autoPromote actually does, and the important ordering constraint that profile changes should happen before browser interactions. It does not discuss persistence or side effects beyond what the schema already documents, but the description provides meaningful behavioral context rather than just restating the tool 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?

The description is only two sentences, yet it communicates the core operation, the no-parameter behavior, the autoPromote effect, and the profile timing constraint. Every clause earns its place with no filler or repetition.

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 moderate complexity, four optional parameters, and absence of an output schema, the description covers the essential cases: viewing defaults, applying suggestions, and setting a profile before browser interaction. It could be more explicit about what the returned defaults look like or how the defaults object relates to recurring parameters, but it is sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly in the main scenarios.

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 schema already documents all four parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning by explaining the zero-parameter call behavior and by specifying that profile must be set before browser interaction, which is not conveyed by the schema's parameter descriptions alone.

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 opens with a specific verb-resource pair, 'View or set session defaults,' and clarifies that it handles recurring parameters like tab and timeout. This distinguishes it clearly from the sibling browser-interaction tools, which act on pages or tabs rather than session-level configuration.

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 concrete usage conditions: calling with no parameters shows current defaults and auto-promote suggestions, setting autoPromote to true applies them, and profile must be set before any browser interaction. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use the tool, so it doesn't earn a 5, but the guidance is clear and actionable.

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