go_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. It discloses the core action but omits important details such as behavior when there is no forward history, whether it waits for page load, or any error conditions. This is minimal disclosure and leaves the agent with uncertainties.

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 focused sentence with no filler, front-loading the action. It is concise and structured effectively, earning full marks.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description captures the primary function. However, it lacks edge-case behavior (e.g., what happens if there is no forward history) and return-value expectations, leaving some gaps. It is minimally adequate for a simple browser navigation command.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100% and there is no parameter information to provide. The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed. Baseline 4 applies for zero-parameter tools.

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 ('navigate forward') and resource ('browser history'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like go_back and reload. It is unambiguous and directly conveys the 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 the tool is for moving forward in browser history but does not explicitly state when to use it over go_back or mention prerequisites like having previously navigated back. No exclusions or alternatives are named, so guidance is only implied.

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