forward

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=false already signals this changes browser state, so the description contributes nothing on that axis. It omits what happens when there is no forward entry (silent no-op versus error) and whether navigation completes synchronously, which is the behavior an agent most needs here.

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?

A single four-word sentence with zero padding and the action front-loaded. Its brevity is not padded, though it sits close to under-specification rather than crispness.

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 parameters and no output schema, the description is the only source of return behavior, yet it says nothing about what happens on success or on failure. For a state-changing navigation tool, the missing no-history case is a real gap an agent could stumble on.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter meaning to convey and the baseline of 4 applies. Nothing in the schema is left unexplained.

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?

"Go forward in history" gives a direction and a resource, but "history" is never qualified as browser navigation history, so the agent must infer scope from the sibling "back". The direction is unambiguous, but a single added word ("browser session") would remove the inference.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus navigate, open, or reload, and no mention of the prerequisite that a forward history entry must exist. The agent is left to infer both the trigger condition and the alternative tools entirely.

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