Browser Navigate Forward

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 states the core action. It does not mention side effects, behavior when there is no forward history, page-load waiting, or whether the current tab's state is altered beyond history position.

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 efficient sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and scope ('forward one history step in the tab') with zero waste.

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-step navigation tool, the description is minimally adequate, but it omits usage conditions, parameter meaning, and failure behavior. The output schema covers return values, yet the overall definition lacks enough context for an agent to use it with confidence in edge cases.

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, but neither 'tab' nor 'session' is mentioned. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory and optional, yet the tool invocation semantics (e.g., what a null tab means) are left entirely to inference.

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 uses a specific verb ('Go forward') and a specific resource ('one history step in the tab'), making the action unambiguous. It naturally distinguishes itself from the sibling browser_navigate_back by stating the direction of navigation.

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 for when to use this tool versus browser_navigate_back, browser_navigate, or browser_reload. The only hint is the word 'forward', which implies history navigation, but no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternatives are stated.

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