Manage History

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states that list is read-only, that reload ignores the cache, and that navigation actions can trigger page loads or redirects. It also advises verifying the resulting URL or title afterward, which is practical behavioral context.

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 compact and front-loaded: a one-sentence purpose followed by labeled action semantics and a brief navigation-caveat. Every sentence earns its place, with no filler or repetition of schema facts that are already structural.

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 tool with a single optional enum parameter, an output schema, and actions fully documented, the description is complete. It covers what the tool operates on, each possible action, the read-only behavior, and cross-tool follow-up guidance.

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 0%, so the description must explain the parameters, and it does. Every enum value for 'action' is described with its behavioral effect, from back/forward/reload to the read-only list. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Manage or inspect the current browser tab's navigation history.' It clearly distinguishes the tool's scope from siblings like open_url and get_page_info by naming them explicitly, so an agent can tell exactly what this tool does.

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 gives explicit usage instructions for each action ('Use back, forward, or reload' vs 'Use list'), identifies the read-only variant, and points to alternatives for other needs ('Use open_url for navigation to an arbitrary URL', 'Use get_page_info afterward'). This is strong when-to-use guidance.

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