goto

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It does disclose that it can create a tab as a side effect when none is active, which is valuable. However, it doesn't disclose other behavioral traits like whether navigation replaces the current page context, whether it's destructive to page state, or whether a return/stale-tab situation is handled.

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?

Two sentences, both earn their place. First states the primary action, second handles the edge case of no active tab. Zero wasted words and appropriately front-loaded.

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 2-parameter navigation tool with 100% schema coverage and a clear output-less model, this is mostly complete. However, it could benefit from clarifying the distinction from new_tab and fetch_url given the large sibling set, and from noting whether this tool blocks until page load or returns immediately. These are modest gaps.

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%, so the schema fully documents both parameters (url and tab_id). The description adds the nuance that tab_id is used when provided, otherwise the active tab is used. This is a mild addition but mostly restates what the schema already conveys with 100% coverage.

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 states a clear verb+resource: navigates a tab to a URL. It identifies the active tab as default target and mentions creating a tab if none is active. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish from siblings like new_tab (which creates a tab) or fetch_url (which fetches without navigating), though the scope is reasonably clear.

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 instruction 'Creates a tab if none is active' provides some guidance on the non-existent-tab scenario. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use vs when-not-to-use guidance, and doesn't mention when to use new_tab vs goto or how it relates to siblings like fetch_url or browser_exec for navigation purposes.

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