goto

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only restates the action itself. It does not mention whether navigation waits for page load, whether it preserves browsing history, or potential errors for invalid URLs, leaving significant behavioral traits unstated.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential information without any redundant words. It is appropriately 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 simple one-parameter tool, the description is nearly complete, but it lacks context about post-navigation behavior (e.g., return values or waiting state) and does not address how 'goto' differs from the sibling 'open'. Given no output schema and no annotations, this omission leaves minor gaps in overall completeness.

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 parameter 'url' has no schema description (0% coverage), and the description merely repeats the word 'URL' without specifying format, scheme requirements, or accepted variants (e.g., relative vs absolute). The description adds minimal meaning beyond the parameter name itself.

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?

The description 'Navigate the current tab to a URL' clearly states the action (navigate), the resource (current tab), and the destination (URL). It is specific enough to define the tool's core behavior, though it does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling tool 'open', which may serve a similar purpose.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'open' or 'click'. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or preferred contexts, leaving the agent without direction for tool selection.

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