Navigate Chrome tab

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

The description discloses important behavioral traits: it does not activate a background tab by default and does not deactivate the focused tab, and it explains when to pass active: true. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden and does a good job of clarifying side effects around tab focus.

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 two sentences, front-loads the core action, and immediately clarifies the key behavioral nuance (focus handling). Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words.

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 navigation tool with a rich schema (after, waitFor, snapshot, pageStatus), the description covers the essential behavior and focus semantics. It doesn't explain return values, but there is no output schema and the tool's primary purpose is clear. The nested 'after' options are well-documented in the schema, so the description doesn't need to repeat them.

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 80%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds meaning by explaining the default focus behavior and the active parameter's purpose, but it does not elaborate on the 'after' object or tabId/sessionTabId semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specific verb ('Navigate') and resource ('active tab or target tab to a URL'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like activate_tab by clarifying focus behavior. It clearly identifies what the tool does and its scope.

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 clear context on when to use the tool (navigating a tab to a URL) and explains the default focus behavior, which helps an agent decide when to pass active: true. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as when to use click or type instead.

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