new_tab

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the core action but omits important behavioral details like whether the new tab is focused, what the return value is, or whether an already-open browser is required. It does not contradict any annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It conveys the essential action efficiently, though it is slightly terse for the necessary information it should include.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations. The description does not explain return behavior, side effects, or prerequisites. Given that sibling tools include connection and page-management tools, the description is under-specified for an agent to understand the full context.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, and the parameter `url` is only implied by '打开一个网址' (open a URL). The description adds no format, constraints, or additional meaning beyond the schema's property name, so it fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 action: open a new tab and open a URL using the DrissionPage-controlled browser. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like `get` or `wait` by specifying the new-tab-and-navigate behavior.

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 provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as `get` or `connect_or_open_browser`. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or typical use cases.

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