Move back or forward through the current tab's browsing history by a chosen number of steps. Specify direction and step count to quickly return to earlier pages.
Go back or forward in the active tab's session history
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| steps | No | ||
| direction | No | back |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It states the action but does not mention side effects such as triggering a page load, behavior at the beginning/end of history, or whether the tool returns a value. For a navigation-changing tool, this is a significant gap.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It accurately and efficiently states what the tool does and where it operates.
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?
With no output schema and no annotations, even a simple two-parameter tool needs more context. The description omits behavior at history boundaries, whether navigation waits for page load, and interaction with the active tab lifecycle, leaving the agent to infer these from the schema alone.
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 description coverage is 0%, and the description says nothing about the two parameters (steps or direction). The direction enum and defaults are only in the schema, and the description makes no effort to explain or contextualize them.
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 ('Go back or forward') and identifies the exact resource ('active tab's session history'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like navigate (URL navigation) and history_search (searching history).
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 is given about when to choose this tool over navigate or history_search, and there are no prerequisites or exclusions. The phrase 'active tab's session history' implies the context, but it does not state when to use it versus alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.