Read a page's console messages, uncaught exceptions, and failed loads oldest first, with optional level filtering and log clearing.
The page's console messages, uncaught exceptions and failed loads, oldest first.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| clear | No | Empty the log after reading | |
| level | No | This level and above |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.7.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral detail — that exceptions and failed loads are included and that ordering is oldest first — but it is silent on the fact that passing clear=true mutates the log, and on whether the log persists across navigations.
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 compact sentence with no filler, and the most important information (what is returned) is front-loaded. Nothing could be trimmed without losing content.
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, the description does carry the burden of describing return content, and it does so reasonably: message types, exception capture, failed loads, and ordering. It stops short of describing entry format or whether the log is scoped to the current page session, which would matter for a diagnostics tool.
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 100%, so both parameters (clear, level) are already documented in the schema, including the enum values for level. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the ordering note, so the baseline of 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?
The description names the specific resource (the page's console messages) and enumerates what is captured: uncaught exceptions and failed loads, plus ordering (oldest first). It lacks an explicit verb and does not distinguish itself from the sibling browser_network_requests, which an agent could plausibly confuse it with when hunting for diagnostics.
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?
There is no statement of when to reach for this tool versus browser_network_requests, browser_snapshot, or browser_evaluate, and no mention of prerequisites such as needing an open page. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.