browser_navigate_forward

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits itself. It only says 'go forward in history' and does not state what happens when there is no forward history, whether navigation waits for page load, or whether the tab must already exist.

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 sentence with no filler and the core action is front-loaded. It is appropriately concise for a simple navigation action, though it could include a small amount of behavioral context 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 an output schema, the description omits important context such as failure behavior, return value, and how it fits into the navigation workflow with siblings like browser_navigate_back. It is minimally complete but relies heavily on inference.

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 baseline of 3 applies. The description adds little beyond the schema, merely reinforcing that the action applies to a specific tab; it does not clarify optionality or agent-routing behavior beyond what is already in 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?

States a specific action ('go forward') applied to browser history for a specified tab, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like browser_navigate_back and browser_navigate. Even though the name already implies the direction, the description adds the 'history' and 'tab' context clearly.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as after a back-navigation or when forward history exists. The agent must infer the intended use purely from the tool name and general browser semantics.

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