socials_navigate

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a non-obvious behavior ('Does not require that tab to be active') but omits return value, side effects, or permissions. Some behavioral context is provided, but it is incomplete.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every word adds information. The second sentence contributes an important behavioral constraint, making it appropriately sized with no filler.

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 low-complexity with only two parameters, and the description covers the core action and tab selection logic. However, without an output schema, it does not explain what the tool returns or indicates success, leaving a completeness gap.

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%, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds extra value by referencing socials_open_tab's URL patterns and giving a concrete YouTube search example, which enriches the meaning of the 'url' parameter beyond the schema's generic description.

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 (navigate), the target resource (pinned agent tab or tab_id), and the destination (URL). It also adds scale by noting the tab need not be active, which distinguishes it from tools like socials_reload_tab or socials_focus_agent_tab.

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 implies when to use this tool (when navigating an existing pinned tab) and references socials_open_tab for URL patterns, which aids in selecting the right tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools.

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