browser_new_tab

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

Adds context that it opens Chrome if needed, which is useful. However, it does not explain the destructiveHint annotation, nor does it disclose whether the new tab is focused or how success is indicated. The description partially carries the burden beyond the annotation.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the parameter explanation is succinct. Perfectly sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, it covers the basic invocation, but omits important behavioral details like whether the tab becomes active, how to verify success, or why the tool is marked destructive. It is not fully complete for an agent.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explicitly explains that the url parameter is the URL to navigate, providing meaning beyond the schema's bare string type.

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 tab.' The description clearly distinguishes it from browser_close_tab and browser_switch_tab, but does not explicitly differentiate from browser_open. The name itself is self-explanatory.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like browser_open or browser_switch_tab. It only instructs to pass a URL, leaving the selection decision to inference.

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