navigate

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. However, it only states the core action and does not disclose side effects like triggering 'Leave site?' dialogs, changing current tab state, or potential blocking. The force parameter in the schema mentions the dialog, but the description itself lacks this context.

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 exactly two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and contains no filler. It is concise and well-structured.

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 simplicity, the schema's thorough parameter documentation, and the presence of an output schema, the description is largely complete. However, it omits some behavioral context that might be important in browser automation (e.g., whether the current page state is lost). This is a minor gap.

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 already documents all parameters clearly. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only reinforcing the tabId prerequisite.

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 tool's function: 'Navigate to a URL, or go forward/back in browser history.' This uses a specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like read_page or tabs_context by focusing on navigation actions.

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 gives explicit usage guidance: 'If you don't have a valid tab ID, use tabs_context first to get available tabs.' This names the alternative tool and indicates a prerequisite, which is more than most tool descriptions provide.

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