Skip to main content
Glama
brunoboto96

SceneScout

by brunoboto96
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

scout_back

Go back in browser history to test back-button resilience and verify the prior page or state is restored.

Instructions

Go back in browser history (tests back-button resilience).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taskNoWhat you are DOING right now, in a few words: the action, not the acceptance criteria. "Filtering the documents register by status", "Filling the deviation form with invalid dates", "Signing in as QA_Team" — NOT "§2.4 filtering narrows the set and the filter is reflected in the URL", which is what you are CHECKING, not what you are doing. Naming the item you are on is fine ("§2.4: filtering the documents register"); keep the rest to what a colleague would see over your shoulder. It stays set until you pass a different one, so a batch costs a few words, not one per call. Required on the tools that act unless a journey or an earlier call already set one.
leaveNoHow to answer if the page asks to confirm leaving (a beforeunload prompt over unsent input): true leaves and discards that input, false stays. Omitted, observe and read-only stay and other modes leave. The result says when the page asked.
sessionNoTarget this session directly instead of the active one — pass it explicitly when dispatching to MULTIPLE sessions in one turn (e.g. two scout_click calls with different `session`), which then run CONCURRENTLY rather than queueing. Omit for single-session sequential use.
objectiveNoOld name for `task` (2.0). Prefer `task`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv3.17.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / leave
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "How to answer if the page asks to confirm leaving (a beforeunload prompt over unsent input): true leaves and discards that input, false stays. Omitted, observe and read-only stay and other modes leave. The result says when the page asked.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv3.4.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / objective
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Old name for `task` (2.0). Prefer `task`.",
+  "maxLength": 120,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / task
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "What you are DOING right now, in a few words: the action, not the acceptance criteria. \"Filtering the documents register by status\", \"Filling the deviation form with invalid dates\", \"Signing in as QA_Team\" — NOT \"§2.4 filtering narrows the set and the filter is reflected in the URL\", which is what you are CHECKING, not what you are doing. Naming the item you are on is fine (\"§2.4: filtering the documents register\"); keep the rest to what a colleague would see over your shoulder. It stays set until you pass a different one, so a batch costs a few words, not one per call. Required on the tools that act unless a journey or an earlier call already set one.",
+  "maxLength": 120,
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Addedv1.1.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not say what happens when there is no history to go back to, whether the page is reloaded/re-verified, whether in-page state survives, or whether the tool waits for load — all material for a navigation action in a test harness.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single short sentence, action first, with the parenthetical earning its place by giving the testing rationale. No waste.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a no-annotation, no-output-schema navigation tool with four well-documented params, the definition is minimally adequate but silent on outcome (no return shape, no statement of what the agent should do if history is empty). It is callable but not fully self-explanatory.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents task, leave, session and objective in depth. The description adds nothing about any parameter; baseline 3 applies when the schema does all the work.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Go back in browser history', with a parenthetical scoping it to back-button resilience testing. That is enough to tell it apart from scout_navigate and scout_click, though it never names the sibling it complements.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The parenthetical '(tests back-button resilience)' implies when this tool is relevant, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no exclusions, and no mention of scout_navigate as the forward-navigation counterpart.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools