socials_linkedin_go_to_page

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the navigation intent but fails to mention side effects (e.g., browser tab navigation), requirements (e.g., authenticated LinkedIn session), or error handling for invalid page numbers.

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, concise sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the verb and object, making the purpose immediately clear.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, so the description is mostly adequate. However, it omits any prerequisites (e.g., must be on a LinkedIn search results page) and doesn't clarify what happens after navigation. Still, for its minimal complexity, it does not leave major gaps.

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 input schema already describes the 'page' parameter as 'Page number to navigate to (1-based)', achieving 100% schema description coverage. The description adds no additional semantic information beyond what is already in the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 the action ('Go to') and the resource ('a specific page number of LinkedIn search results'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tool 'socials_linkedin_next_page' by emphasizing navigation to an arbitrary page rather than sequential paging.

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 word 'specific' implies use when a target page number is known, as opposed to the sibling 'next_page' tool. However, the description offers no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention the need for an existing search results session.

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