browser_navigate_back

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., whether it waits for page load, what happens if no history exists, or side effects on page state).

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, efficient sentence without any wasted words, front-loading the core purpose.

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 simple action with no parameters or output schema, the description covers the basic purpose but lacks details on behavior like page load handling or error states, which could be important for an agent to invoke 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?

No parameters exist and schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter info, which is adequate per baseline of 4 for zero-parameter tools.

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 'Go back to the previous page in the history' clearly states the action (go back) and resource (browser history), distinguishing it from siblings like browser_navigate (which likely goes to a specific URL) and browser_click.

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 usage for navigating back in history but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives like browser_navigate, nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., existence of previous page) or potential failure cases.

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