Read the current page in an active web session to gain context and reason over its contents.
Reads the current page of a web session so you can reason over it.
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": "web_read"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.0.336Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'reads the current page', lacking details on output format, side effects, or requirements. The minimal disclosure is insufficient for a tool with no annotations.
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 sentence with a clear verb-object structure. It is front-loaded and contains no wasted words, earning its place efficiently.
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?
Given no output schema and no parameters, the description covers the basic action. However, it omits what exactly is read (HTML, text, markdown) or how the output is structured, which could leave an agent uncertain about the return value.
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?
With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage (trivial), the description adds no parameter-specific meaning. Baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description succinctly describes the action without needing parameter details.
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 clearly states the tool reads the current page of a web session for reasoning. It uses a specific verb ('reads') and resource ('current page of a web session'), and implicitly distinguishes from siblings like 'web_navigate' or 'web_click'.
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 description implies usage for reading page content but offers no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not mention alternatives like 'web_extract' or 'web_eval', leaving differentiation to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.