charlotte_navigate

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the return behavior ('Returns page representation after navigation') and default detail level, and warns about 'networkidle' unreliability on SPAs. It does not mention auth or destructive effects, but for a navigation tool, the behavior is sufficiently transparent.

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?

Two sentences, zero fluff. First sentence states purpose and default return. Second explains detail options and suggests alternative. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The description covers the core behavior and parameter nuances. It explains the return value at a high level (page representation with detail options). No output schema exists, so the description's coverage is adequate. It could specify the structure of the page representation, but overall it is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 100% (all parameters documented), so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining default detail behavior (includes landmarks, headings, counts) and providing a note on wait_for. This goes beyond the 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?

The description clearly states 'Load a URL in the active page', which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like charlotte_find by mentioning it for locating elements, but could more explicitly differentiate from other navigation tools (e.g., charlotte_back, charlotte_forward).

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 explains when to use the tool (to navigate to a URL) and suggests an alternative ('use charlotte_find to locate specific elements'). It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough.

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