List every localStorage key-value pair for the active page's origin, enabling inspection of client-side stored data.
List all localStorage key-value pairs for the active page's origin.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the read-only action ('List') and scope ('active page's origin'), which covers the core behavior, but it does not address edge cases such as empty storage, access errors, or whether the operation has side effects. For a simple list operation this is adequate but not exhaustive.
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 sentence that is both concise and front-loaded: it names the action, the resource, and the scope without any filler. Every word 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?
For a zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description sufficiently communicates what the agent will receive ('key-value pairs') and the scope. It does not specify the exact return structure (e.g., array of objects), but the phrase 'list all localStorage key-value pairs' gives enough guidance for a straightforward read operation.
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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema is empty, so there is nothing to document. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description appropriately adds no parameter information because none exists.
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 uses a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('localStorage key-value pairs'), and a clear scope ('for the active page's origin'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like browser_sessionstorage_list, browser_cookie_list, and the localStorage get/set/delete/clear variants.
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: call this when you need to enumerate all localStorage entries for the current origin. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over browser_localstorage_get or mention any exclusions or alternatives, so it relies on inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.