Reload the current page by navigating to its URL. Optionally return a snapshot to view the updated content right away.
Reload the current page by navigating to its current URL
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| snapshot | No | Also return the page snapshot after the action (default: yes). Use it when you need to see the result right away. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.4.0Input schema / properties / snapshotAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Also return the page snapshot after the action (default: yes). Use it when you need to see the result right away.",
+ "type": "boolean"
+}v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one useful behavioral detail — that reload is implemented as a navigation to the current URL, not a cached refresh — but says nothing about side effects like lost form state or pending requests.
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?
One short sentence with the action front-loaded and no filler. It is appropriately sized, though it is minimal enough that it could have carried a bit more routing guidance without bloat.
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 one-parameter reload tool with full schema coverage and annotations present, the description gives an agent enough to invoke it correctly. No output schema exists, but a reload's result is unsurprising, so nothing critical is missing.
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% and the single optional 'snapshot' parameter is fully documented in the schema, including a default. The description contributes nothing about the parameter, so the baseline 3 applies.
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?
States a specific verb+resource ('Reload the current page') and clarifies the mechanism ('by navigating to its current URL'), which separates it from browser_navigate in practice. It does not explicitly name the sibling it is not, so it stops short of a 5.
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 usage context is implied by 'current page' — you reload rather than navigate elsewhere — but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or reference to alternatives like browser_navigate or browser_snapshot. Adequate but leaves routing to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.