stt_navigate

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It discloses login behavior and return type (text snapshot), which is sufficient for safe usage. Lacking details on potential side effects like session changes.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with key actions (log in, navigate, return snapshot), no superfluous words. Efficient and clear.

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 no output schema and a single parameter, the description adequately covers the tool's behavior and output. It distinguishes from sibling snapshot tools by noting navigation is performed first.

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 100% for the single parameter, and the description adds a concrete example ('/dashboard/desk') and clarifies it can be a full URL, enhancing understanding beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: log in if needed, navigate to a path/URL, and return a text snapshot. It differentiates from sibling tools like stt_click or stt_fill which are for interactions, not navigation and snapshot.

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 implies context (login handling) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like stt_snapshot or stt_status. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance provided.

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