Fetch a list of all open browser pages, enabling selection of a specific tab for further devtools inspection.
Get a list of pages open in the browser.
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": "list_pages"
}
}| 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?
The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the safety profile, and the description's 'Get' wording aligns with a read-only operation. However, the description adds little beyond the annotation, such as whether the result is a snapshot or includes all browser contexts.
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. It immediately states the operation and the resource, which is ideal for a simple tool.
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, read-only listing tool, the description tells the agent what it will get: a list of open pages. It does not specify the exact structure of each entry (e.g., page ID, URL, or title), and there is no output schema to fill that gap, but the missing detail is minor for simple enumeration.
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 has zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage, so there is no parameter detail the description needs to supply. 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?
The description states a specific verb ('Get') and a specific resource ('pages open in the browser'). It is naturally distinct from siblings such as select_page, new_page, navigate_page, and close_page, which act on or create pages rather than listing them.
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 intended use is clear: enumerate currently open browser pages before deciding which page to operate on. No explicit alternative or exclusion is named, but no sibling performs the same listing operation, so this is acceptable.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.