navigate

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure and excels by detailing side effects ('destructive of current page state; discards unsaved work'), prerequisites, auth requirements ('subject to same-origin policy; may require credentials'), rate limits ('none'), and return values ('navigation confirmation'). This covers critical behavioral traits beyond basic functionality.

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 efficiently structured with key information front-loaded (purpose, side effects, prerequisites) and uses bullet-like sections for clarity. While slightly dense, every sentence adds value, such as the explicit alternative and behavioral details, avoiding waste.

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's complexity (destructive operation with prerequisites) and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is highly complete. It covers purpose, usage, behavioral traits, parameters, and alternatives, providing all necessary context for an AI agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 is 3. The description adds value by contextualizing the URL parameter with accessibility notes ('subject to local-only restrictions if enabled') and linking it to the tool's purpose, though it doesn't provide additional syntax details beyond the schema. This elevates it above the baseline.

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 verb ('navigates') and resource ('current Chrome tab') with specific scope ('to a specified URL, loading new page content'). It distinguishes from sibling 'reload' by explicitly mentioning the alternative for refreshing the current page, making the purpose distinct and well-defined.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool ('Use this to change the current page') and when to use alternatives ('Alternatives: 'reload' to refresh current page'). It also includes prerequisites ('requires an active Chrome tab; URL must be valid and accessible'), offering clear context for proper usage.

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