Choose a browser page by ID to set it as the active context for subsequent DevTools inspections. Optionally bring it to the front.
Select a page as a context for future tool calls.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pageId | Yes | The ID of the page to select. Call list_pages to get available pages. | |
| bringToFront | No | Whether to focus the page and bring it to the top. |
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 signals no data mutation, so the description's main job is to disclose the stateful selection effect, which it does by saying the page becomes context for future calls. It does not mention persistence or clearing behavior, but the key behavioral trait is present and does not contradict the annotation.
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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to explaining the tool's purpose and timing.
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 simple two-parameter, read-only selection tool, the description plus schema covers the essential agent workflow: what to select, how to find the ID, and what the selection affects. It could mention whether the selected context persists or is replaced, but that is a minor gap for this tool.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3 and the description does not need to carry parameter documentation. The pageId parameter description adds useful guidance ('Call list_pages to get available pages'), but that lives in the schema rather than the tool description itself.
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 names a specific verb and resource: selecting a page to act as context for future tool calls. It is clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like list_pages or close_page, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with 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?
It explicitly frames the tool as a setup step—'context for future tool calls'—which tells an agent when to invoke it. The pageId parameter also gives a concrete prerequisite by directing the agent to call list_pages for available pages, though the main description does not state when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.