tab_infoRetrieve the current URL, title, and loading state of a specified browser tab.
获取标签页的当前地址、标题与加载状态。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tab_id | No | ||
| browser_id | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | No | ||
| title | No | ||
| tab_id | Yes | ||
| browser_id | No | ||
| context_id | No | ||
| ready_state | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates this is a read-only operation. The description does not add any additional behavioral details or side effects, but it does not contradict the annotation either.
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, concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It is well-structured and to the point.
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 getter, the description covers the core functionality. However, it does not mention the output schema or any edge cases (e.g., behavior when no tab_id is provided), which could be relevant for an agent but is not strictly required.
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?
The two parameters, tab_id and browser_id, are not described at all. The schema provides no descriptions, and the tool description does not explain what these identifiers refer to or how they should be used. This leaves the agent without critical information.
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?
Description clearly states the tool retrieves the current URL, title, and loading status of a tab, using the verb '获取' (get) with a specific resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like tab_new or tab_close, and its purpose is unambiguous.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_page_info or browser_status. It does not mention any specific conditions or use cases beyond the basic function.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.