browser_new_tab

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses little beyond the action itself. It does not say whether the new tab becomes focused/active, whether a browser session must already be running, or what happens on an invalid URL — all relevant for a browser-mutating tool.

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; the action and target are stated immediately.

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 one-parameter tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. It nonetheless omits tab-activation/focus behavior and failure conditions, which an agent would need to use it reliably alongside browser_select_tab.

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 description coverage is 100% for the single url parameter, so the schema already documents it fully. The description only restates that a URL is supplied and adds no format or constraint details, making the baseline 3 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 gives a specific verb ("Opens") and resource ("a new tab in the user's Chrome browser") plus the required input (a URL), so the action is unambiguous. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the closest sibling browser_navigate, but "new tab" is enough for an agent to distinguish the basic intent.

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?

There is no guidance on when to open a new tab versus using browser_navigate on the current tab, or how this relates to browser_select_tab/browser_list_tabs. The condition for choosing this tool over its siblings is left entirely to inference.

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