go_forward

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states the basic behavior but says nothing about side effects, whether it waits for page load, what happens if there is no forward history, or error behavior. This is minimal transparency.

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 one short sentence with no filler and the core action is front-loaded. However, it is under-specified relative to the number of sibling navigation tools, making it concise but not optimally informative.

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 tool, this is adequate at a surface level, but it lacks behavioral and usage context. It doesn't mention prerequisites like an existing forward history entry, nor does it help the agent choose among go_back, go_forward, and navigate.

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 has zero parameters and the schema is empty, so there is no parameter documentation burden. The description does not need to add parameter detail; the baseline for a zero-parameter tool is appropriate.

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 states a clear action ('navigate') and a specific resource/scope ('forward in history'). It distinguishes from go_back by the word 'forward', but it doesn't explicitly explain what 'history' means in the browser context or contrast it with siblings like navigate.

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 is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as go_back, navigate, or reload. The only hint is the word 'forward', which implies post-go_back usage, but this is not made explicit. An agent would have to infer the appropriate context.

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