Navigate to a URL, with PhiShark preflight and browser-deep security checks to block or warn on phishing and high-risk pages.
Navigate to a URL
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | The URL to navigate to |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description does not elaborate on side effects such as discarding the current page, waiting for load, or handling errors. While annotations indicate destructiveHint=true, the description adds no extra context about the navigation behavior beyond the literal action.
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, direct sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for the simple action, though it could benefit from some additional context without becoming verbose.
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?
The description lacks important context such as whether navigation waits for page load, how errors are reported, or the impact on the current browsing session. Given the tool modifies state (as indicated by destructiveHint), more context about the navigation behavior would be expected.
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 schema fully describes the only parameter 'url' with the same text as the description. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description adds no additional meaning or constraints (e.g., format, absolute vs. relative) beyond what is already in the schema.
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 action 'Navigate to a URL' with a specific resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like browser_navigate_back by implying forward navigation to a new URL, though it could be more explicit about the effect on the current page.
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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool over alternatives. It does not mention scenarios where browser_navigate is preferred over browser_navigate_back or other navigation methods, nor any prerequisites or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.