scout_goto

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

No annotations provided, so description covers behavioral traits: it navigates, captures API requests, returns page text/elements, and requires network monitoring before navigation. Doesn't disclose side effects like closure or auth, but adequate for a navigation tool.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with action, no fluff. Efficiently conveys core behavior, prerequisite, and an option.

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?

Given full schema coverage and existence of output schema, description covers the key points: navigation, API capture, return type, and an important option. Lacks detail on output structure, but output schema presumably handles that.

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 already describes both parameters (100% coverage). Description adds context for new_tab ('use to open a new tab while keeping current page'), which is valuable but not extensive. No additional meaning for url beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states it navigates to a URL and captures API requests, returning page text and interactive elements. Distinguishes from siblings like scout_fetch and scout_act, but does not explicitly differentiate from scout_scan or scout_inspect.

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?

Provides a prerequisite (listen.start() must precede) and explains new_tab behavior, but lacks guidance on when to use versus alternatives like scout_apis or scout_request.

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