open-browser-tab

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states a new tab is opened but omits whether the tab becomes active/focused, whether it requires the browser to be running, what is returned, or any permission/blocking behavior.

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?

One short sentence with the action front-loaded; the parenthetical adds usage value rather than filler. Efficient overall.

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, the description covers the basic purpose adequately. However, with zero annotation coverage it leaves the tab's resulting state and return value unspecified.

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 single url parameter is undocumented in both schema and description. The phrase 'when the user asks to open a website' only loosely implies a URL, adding no format, validation, or syntax detail.

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 in the user's browser.' This clearly contrasts with siblings like close-browser-tabs and get-list-of-open-tabs without naming them explicitly.

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 parenthetical gives an explicit trigger condition ('useful when the user asks to open a website'), which is clear usage context. It does not mention exclusions or alternatives (e.g., reusing an existing tab), so it stops short of a 5.

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