navigate

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the default wait-for-complete behavior and the immediate-return behavior for wait=False, which is useful. However, it doesn't disclose what happens to the current page (is it replaced? does it open in the current tab?), timeout behavior, or error conditions (e.g., navigation failures).

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 compact and front-loaded with the primary usage example. Every sentence adds value; the example and the parameter clarifications are useful. Slightly terse but 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 no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage of 3 parameters, the description should do more heavy lifting. 'timeout' is undocumented, the relationship between 'loaded' and 'wait' is unclear, and there's no mention of what the return value is or error handling. The in-code documentation style ('loaded 标记') assumes background knowledge.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for parameters. The description explains wait (boolean) and the loaded marker, and implicitly url. However, 'timeout' is not described at all, and 'loaded' is mentioned as a marker but its relationship to the wait parameter isn't fully clarified. Partial compensation but incomplete.

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 navigate() navigates to a URL and waits for readyState==='complete' by default. It's a specific verb+resource action. It doesn't explicitly distinguish from siblings like new_tab or switch_tab, but the navigation intent is clear given wait/loaded semantics.

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?

It explains when wait=False immediately returns vs default behavior waiting for load. However, it doesn't mention when to use navigate vs siblings like switch_tab (for existing tabs) or new_tab (for opening new ones). No explicit exclusions or alternatives are named.

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