navigate

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as state changes, history manipulation, or prerequisites. It only states that it supports any website. The schema hints at loading behavior via waitUntil, but the description lacks explicit safety or side-effect information.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose ('导航到指定 URL') and concise use cases. No redundant or extraneous 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?

For a simple navigation tool with well-described parameters, the description is complete enough to cover main use cases. However, it could mention prerequisites (e.g., browser must be launched) or side effects (adds to history), but these are not critical given the context.

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 good parameter descriptions (url format, timeout default, waitUntil enum). The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states it navigates to a specified URL and supports any website, with specific use cases like opening pages or redirecting after clicking. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like back, forward, and reload, but lacks explicit differentiation from 'launch' which initializes the browser.

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 gives context ('可用于打开网页、点击链接后的跳转') implying when to use it (opening pages, after link clicks), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives among the sibling tools.

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