Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
jev-reach

jev-reach

by rashedInt32
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

close_page

Close a browser page by its ID to manage open tabs and free resources. Works with list_pages; the last remaining page stays open.

Instructions

Closes the page by its index. The last open page cannot be closed.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "pageId": "<pageId>"
    },
    "name": "close_page"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageIdYesThe ID of the page to close. Call list_pages to list pages.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already mark this as non-read-only, and the description adds the edge constraint that the last page cannot be closed. It does not describe failure behavior, side effects, or whether the close is permanent, but for a simple close action this is acceptable.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences with no filler. The main action is front-loaded and the important constraint follows immediately.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a one-parameter tool with a fully described schema and an annotation, the description covers the core action and the key edge case. An explicit pointer to list_pages in the main description would help, but the parameter description already provides that.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, including an instruction to call list_pages to obtain pageId, so the description does not need to repeat parameter details. The description's 'index' wording slightly conflicts with the schema's 'ID' terminology but does not add meaningful new semantics.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a clear action and resource: closes a page. It also adds a meaningful scope constraint: the last open page cannot be closed. However, saying 'by its index' while the schema names the parameter 'pageId' introduces minor terminology ambiguity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The second sentence provides an implicit usage boundary: do not try to close the last open page. It does not explicitly compare against alternatives such as select_page, new_page, or navigate_page, so the guidance is implied rather than fully explicit.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools