Reload the current web page to update its content or reset any dynamic state.
Refresh the current page.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "scout_refresh"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states 'refresh' without disclosing potential side effects (e.g., loss of unsaved data, whether it waits for page load) or safety profile. This is insufficient for an agent to assess impact.
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 short sentence with no waste. It is appropriately sized for a tool with zero parameters and a straightforward action.
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 simple 0-param tool, the description covers the basic action. However, it does not mention the return value or behavior (e.g., whether it resolves after load), and with no output schema, the agent lacks full context. Adequate but minimal.
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?
No parameters exist. With 0 parameters and 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter details, which is acceptable given the absence of parameters.
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 'Refresh the current page' clearly states a specific action and resource, and it distinguishes from sibling navigation tools like scout_back and scout_forward. However, it adds little beyond the tool name itself.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as scout_navigate or scout_wait. The agent is not informed about scenarios where refresh is appropriate or when other tools are better suited.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.