browser_forward

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says nothing about what happens when there is no forward history, whether the call errors or is a no-op, or whether it waits for the page to load — all meaningful behaviors for an agent orchestrating browser navigation.

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 with the action front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though almost to the point of under-specifying behavior.

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 trivial one-parameter navigation tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate to invoke it. However, with no annotations and no statement of failure/no-op behavior, an agent lacks enough context to handle edge cases confidently.

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% and the single optional 'delta' parameter is documented as 'Number of steps forward' with a default of 1. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb (navigate) and resource (browser history, forward direction), and the parenthetical '(forward button)' anchors it to a familiar UI action. It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling browser_back, though it never names that sibling or otherwise contrasts itself explicitly.

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 versus browser_back, browser_history, or browser_navigate, all of which live adjacent in the tool list. A caller must infer the intended context entirely from the tool name.

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