Navigate Forward

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full burden, and it delivers the single most important behavioral trait: this is a no-op when no forward history exists rather than an error or a hang. It does not cover session/mode interaction or whether state persists across calls, so not quite a 5.

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?

Two tight sentences; the primary action and analogy come first, followed by the conditional caveat. No filler, no repetition of the title.

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 two-optional-param, no-output-schema navigation tool with no annotations, the description covers the essential behavior an agent needs, including the no-op edge case. Minor gaps remain around session/mode handling and whether the call returns anything, but nothing blocking.

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% with both parameters (mode, sessionId) documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

Specific verb ('navigate forward') and resource (browser history / next page), plus an everyday analogy (forward button) that pins the semantics precisely. It is clearly differentiated from the sibling browser_navigate_back, which it explicitly names.

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?

States the precondition plainly: it only works after browser_navigate_back or a real back navigation. It also tells the agent what happens when the condition isn't met (page stays put). It doesn't discuss mode/session selection, but there is no competing tool to route to, so the guidance is nearly complete.

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