Navigate back one step in the active browser tab's history to return to the previously viewed page.
Go back one step in the active tab's history.
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": "go_back"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not say whether a missing history entry raises an error or is a silent no-op, whether the call blocks until the page loads, or whether it affects only the active tab versus all tabs.
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. The direction and scope appear before any qualifying clause, which is exactly right for a one-shot navigation command.
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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema browser tool the core meaning is complete, but an agent still lacks the failure-mode and load-timing information it needs to sequence calls correctly. With no annotations to fall back on, the description should have covered those.
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 tool takes zero parameters, so the description has nothing extra to explain beyond the schema. Baseline 4 applies for a parameterless tool.
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?
States a specific action and direction ('Go back one step') on a specific target ('the active tab's history'). This cleanly separates it from go_forward, navigate, and reload without the agent needing to open any schema.
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?
Usage is implied by the noun 'history' — call it when you need to return to the previous page. However, there is no guidance on when not to use it (e.g., prefer navigate for a known URL) and no mention of what happens at the start of history.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.