browser_go_forward

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered externally. The description adds nothing beyond them: it does not say what happens if there is no forward history, whether the page reloads or triggers loads, or that session_id must reference an active session.

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?

A single short sentence with zero filler, front-loading the action. Nothing is padded or redundant.

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 one-parameter navigation tool with annotations covering the safety profile, the description is minimally sufficient. It omits the no-forward-history case and any indication of the resulting page state, but no output schema exists and the schema documents the param, so the gap is small rather than critical.

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% and the single session_id parameter is documented in the schema as 'Session ID returned by browser_navigate'. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Navigate forward ... in the browser history'), so the action is unambiguous. It does not explicitly name or contrast with siblings like browser_go_back or browser_navigate, but the direction word 'forward' implicitly separates it from the back-facing tool.

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?

Usage is implied by 'forward in the browser history' — an agent can infer this only applies when prior navigation has created forward history. There is no explicit statement of prerequisites (e.g., a prior browser_go_back or navigation), no failure-mode guidance, and no routing to alternatives such as browser_navigate.

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