new_tab

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the main behaviors (open, group, switch, attach) and the reuse behavior, but omits the fallback when reuse=True finds no reusable tab (though the schema mentions it) and does not explain timeout behavior or potential side effects.

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 a usage example. It contains no filler and directly explains the key points in two sentences.

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?

The description covers the core functionality, but given no output schema and low schema coverage, it lacks details about return values and edge cases (e.g., timeout, fallback). For a simple tool, it is adequate but not fully complete.

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 only 33% (only reuse has a description). The description repeats the reuse semantics from the schema and shows a url example, but does not explain the timeout parameter at all. It adds little value beyond the schema for parameter understanding.

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 adds specific behaviors (add to managed group, switch to it, attach). It distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning the managed group and attach behavior, which are unique to this tool.

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 implies usage for opening a new tab and explains the reuse=True conditional behavior. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like ensure_tab or switch_tab, and lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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