new_page

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

The description goes beyond annotations (readOnlyHint: false, destructiveHint: false) by detailing behavioral traits: it waits for DOMContentLoaded (not every resource), makes the opened page the target for later tools, and preserves cookies/storage/cache. It also mentions using clear_site_data separately for a clean replay. No contradictions with 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 four sentences, well-structured: first sentence states the main action, second provides usage guidance, third adds behavioral details, fourth mentions state preservation. No redundant or unnecessary information; every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the output schema exists and parameters are fully described in the schema, the description provides sufficient context: what the tool does, when to use it, behavioral characteristics, and contrast with sibling. It is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the context of the url parameter (absolute URL, reusing about:blank tab), which is not fully captured in the schema's description. However, the timeout parameter is not elaborated beyond the schema, so not a perfect 5.

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 that the tool opens a separate browser page for a URL, reusing an existing about:blank startup tab. It distinguishes itself from the sibling navigate_page by specifying that navigate_page changes the URL in the existing selected page, making the purpose specific and well-differentiated.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool (when the task needs another tab or should preserve the currently selected page) and when to use the alternative (navigate_page to change the URL in the existing selected page). This provides clear guidelines for tool selection.

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