ruyi_new_page

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

没有 annotations,描述补充了首次调用自动启动 Firefox 这一重要行为,并列出可配置功能(代理、指纹、无头模式、隐私模式)。但未披露副作用(如 cookie 处理)、超时行为或返回内容,透明度有限。

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?

仅两句话,第一句直接陈述功能,第二句概括主要特性和自动启动行为,信息密度高且无冗余,符合 front-loaded 原则。

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?

对于包含 8 个属性和嵌套对象的工具,描述覆盖了核心功能与关键行为,但缺少返回值说明、container 参数的行为解释以及边界条件(如浏览器未安装)的处理。在无输出 schema 的情况下,信息还不够完整。

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?

输入 schema 对全部 8 个参数都有描述,覆盖率 100%。描述中提到的代理、指纹、无头等与 schema 属性对应,但没有额外补充参数的语义或使用细节,因此保持在基线水平。

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?

描述明确说明核心功能:在 ruyipage 指纹浏览器中打开新标签页并导航到目标 URL。这一定义具体且与同类工具(如 ruyi_navigate_page)区分,因为强调'新标签页'而不是简单导航。

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?

描述了主要使用场景(打开新标签页并导航)以及首次调用自动启动 Firefox 的行为,提供了清晰的上下文,但没有明确说明何时不使用或提供替代工具。

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