tab_new

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden: it labels the operation STATE_MUTATING, explains the concrete side effect (creates a new desktop window tab), and states a prerequisite (multi-tab mode support). It stops short of noting focus behavior or permission requirements, but the mutation profile is well disclosed.

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?

Front-loads the action then uses labeled WHEN TO USE / SIDE EFFECTS / LIMITATIONS sections, which is easy to scan. 'Creates new desktop window tab' mildly restates the opening sentence, a small redundancy.

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 zero-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, trigger, side effect, and limitation. A minor gap remains around what the new tab returns or whether it becomes focused, which could matter for chaining with tab_switch.

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 the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to clarify beyond the schema's empty property set.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Open a new chart tab') within a clear context ('TradingView Desktop window'). The phrase 'without disrupting the current tab' implicitly distinguishes it from sibling tools like tab_switch and tab_close.

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?

Explicit WHEN TO USE section gives a clear triggering condition (opening a fresh chart workspace). It does not name alternative sibling tools such as tab_switch or tab_list, so the agent must infer the boundary, but the core guidance is present.

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