manage_tabs

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explains the behavior of each action value and warns that tab indexes can go stale because links or browser actions may open new tabs. It does not discuss reversibility or side effects of close_active, but the meaning of 'close' is reasonably explicit.

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 well organized into an opening statement, scoping sentence, Args breakdown, and Notes. Each action is explained in its own line with enough detail to be useful, and the stale-index caveat is placed where it will be noticed. There is no significant wasted content.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description still covers action semantics, parameter meanings, return contents for list, and the important stale-index edge case. An agent has everything needed to call this tool correctly and recover from tab changes.

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 0%, but the description fully compensates by defining each parameter's role: action enum values, url for action='open', tab_index from action='list' for action='switch', and switch_to for action='open'. This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare input schema.

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 first sentence states a clear verb set and resource: 'List, open, switch between, or close browser tabs.' It also immediately differentiates from sibling tools by saying in-tab navigation belongs to navigate and manage_history, so an agent can distinguish manage_tabs from those related 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 explicitly scopes usage to 'tab management' and excludes browser navigation within the current tab as belonging to navigate and manage_history. It also gives a concrete procedure: call action='list' before switch to obtain a valid tab_index, and re-check tabs after link clicks because new tabs may appear.

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