safari_go_forward

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the action but does not disclose behavioral details such as what happens if there is no forward history (e.g., no-op) or any side effects. The description is basic but not misleading.

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 extremely concise at 4 words ('Go forward in browser history'), front-loading the action. Every word is necessary and no extraneous information.

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 tool with no parameters, no output schema, and a straightforward action, the description is mostly complete. However, it lacks context about when the action is a no-op (no forward history), which could be helpful for agents.

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?

There are no parameters; schema description coverage is 100% (empty properties). The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description adds no extra parameter info since none exist. This is appropriate.

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 'Go forward in browser history' with a specific verb ('Go forward') and resource ('browser history'). It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'safari_go_back', which is the opposite action.

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 implies usage after navigating back, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'safari_go_back' or other navigation tools. There is no guidance on prerequisites or conditions.

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