cdp_go_back

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only restates the action without revealing side effects, error conditions, whether it waits for page load, or what happens if history is empty. This adds no information beyond the tool name.

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 short sentence, so it is concise and not padded. However, it is underspecified and does not fully 'earn its place' because it conveys minimal added value beyond the tool name. It could benefit from a few more details without becoming verbose.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description is too incomplete. It does not mention the need for a connected session, the effect on the current page, or any behavioral constraints. For a navigation tool, this is insufficient for an agent to use it reliably.

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 input schema has one parameter, session_id, with a description that covers 100% of the schema. The tool description itself adds no extra parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies because the schema already documents the parameter adequately.

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 'Go back in history' clearly states the action and resource: it navigates backward in the browser session history. This distinguishes it from siblings like cdp_navigate (go to a specific URL) and cdp_reload (reload current page), though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states the action without indicating prerequisites (e.g., active session) or exclusions (e.g., when at the earliest history entry). No use-case context is provided.

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