go_forward

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It accurately describes the primary behavior but discloses no edge cases: what happens if there is no forward history, whether it waits for page load, or what it returns. This is acceptable for a simple zero-parameter action but not deeply transparent.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. 'Navigate forward in browser history' conveys the full intended action economically and without redundancy.

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, no-output-schema, no-annotation navigation tool, the description is largely complete. An agent can invoke it correctly with the information provided. The only gap is lack of detail about behavior when there is no forward history, which is a minor omission for such a simple action.

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 no parameters and the input schema is empty, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately adds no parameter-specific details because there are no parameters to describe.

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 states a specific action ('Navigate forward') and a clear resource ('browser history'), so an agent can understand the operation. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like go_back or navigate beyond the word 'forward', leaving some differentiation implicit.

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 usage is implied: it is for moving forward through browser session history. But the description does not state when to use it vs go_back, when it might fail, or any prerequisites such as having gone back first. The guidance is inferable but not explicit.

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