browser_go_back

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the core navigation action but does not disclose what happens when history is empty, whether a browser session must already be connected, whether it operates on the active tab, or whether it waits for the page to load.

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 states the action with no filler. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for a parameterless tool.

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 zero-parameter tool with an output schema, the main action is covered, but the description omits operational details such as prerequisites and empty-history behavior. These gaps prevent it from being fully complete despite the low 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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema already exhaustively covers all inputs; the description does not need to explain parameter details. Baseline of 4 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?

The description names a specific action ('Go back') and a clear resource ('browser history'), leaving no doubt about what the tool does. It also implicitly distinguishes itself from browser_go_forward and browser_navigate.

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 statement 'Go back in browser history' gives clear context for when the tool applies: whenever backward navigation in the history stack is needed. It does not name alternatives or exclusions explicitly, but for a zero-parameter action the intended use is obvious.

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