Open Top Search Results

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 states the tool opens new tabs, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., whether it modifies existing tabs, required permissions beyond sessionId, or rate limits). The workflow hint adds minimal behavioral context but is not comprehensive.

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 only two sentences: the first states the core action, the second provides usage guidance. No extraneous information. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool has an output schema (not shown but noted in context), the description does not need to explain return values. It adequately covers the action and workflow. However, it could be more explicit about relying on prior tb_search results, though this is implied.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning to the parameters beyond the schema definitions. For example, it doesn't explain what 'top recommended' means or how the 'limit' parameter affects behavior.

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 uses the specific verb 'Open' and resource 'top recommended search results into new research tabs', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like tb_search (which performs search) and tb_search_open_result (which might open a specific result). The purpose is unambiguous.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Prefer this immediately after tb_search', and what to do next: 'inspect tabs with tb_read_view before tb_extract'. This provides clear workflow context and helps the agent decide correct sequencing.

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