tab_new

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. It only states the action but does not mention whether the new tab becomes active, what happens if url is omitted, whether a tab ID is returned, or how failures are handled.

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 three words with zero filler and immediately conveys the core action. For such a simple tool, this is appropriately concise and front-loaded.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity, there are unanswered questions: focus behavior, return value, URL handling, and whether opening a new tab has side effects like changing tab state. With no output schema and no annotations, these gaps matter for correct invocation and interpretation.

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 for the parameter's meaning. The description does not mention the url parameter at all, leaving the agent to infer its semantics solely from the name and default value.

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 'Open new tab' names a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from related tab tools like tab_select, tab_list, and tab_close. Even without explicit sibling comparisons, the action and target are unambiguous.

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 intended usage is implied by the phrase itself: use when you want a new browser tab. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over navigate or tab_select, nor any mention of alternatives or exclusion cases.

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