browser_list_sessions
List saved browser sessions and their metadata to review, manage, or restore logged-in browsing states.
Instructions
List saved sessions with their metadata.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
List saved browser sessions and their metadata to review, manage, or restore logged-in browsing states.
List saved sessions with their metadata.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and falls short. 'With their metadata' is the only behavioral hint; there is no mention of ordering, pagination, how many sessions are returned, whether inactive sessions are included, or what happens when no sessions are saved.
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 zero filler and no redundancy with the tool name. It is well-formed but so terse that it leaves useful information unstated.
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 listing tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but under-delivers: it never says what 'metadata' contains or what an empty result means. Nothing an agent strictly needs to invoke it is missing, but nothing extra helps it either.
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 there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. The baseline for a parameterless tool 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?
States a specific verb (List) and resource (saved sessions) plus a scope hint ('with their metadata'). It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling session tools browser_save_session, browser_load_session, or browser_delete_session, but the verb choice makes the read-only listing intent inferable.
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?
No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no reference to the save/load/delete session siblings. An agent must infer from the name alone that this is the discovery step preceding load_session or delete_session.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.