navigate

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

Annotations indicate no destructive or idempotent behavior. The description adds context about navigating back/forward in history, but does not disclose behavioral details like page load waiting or parameter interaction effects.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, efficiently conveying the tool's purpose.

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?

With full schema coverage, output schema, and annotations present, the description covers main actions but lacks details on parameter interactions (e.g., when both url and direction are provided) and 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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all parameters. The description mentions 'back/forward' aligning with the direction enum but does not clarify relationships like mutual exclusivity of url and direction.

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 the tool navigates to a URL or through browser history (back/forward), using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes between two distinct modes and helps differentiate from the sibling 'open' 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?

The description implies usage for both URL navigation and history navigation but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'open' or 'refresh', nor when not to use it.

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