back
Return to the previous page in the browser history using session and driver identifiers.
Instructions
Navigate back in history
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| driver | Yes | Driver alias | |
| session_id | Yes | Session ID |
Return to the previous page in the browser history using session and driver identifiers.
Navigate back in history
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| driver | Yes | Driver alias | |
| session_id | Yes | Session ID |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description fails to disclose behavioral traits like whether it waits for page loads, handles empty history, or requires specific permissions. The minimal text does not fill this gap.
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 short sentence, efficiently conveying the core purpose. However, it could be slightly expanded for clarity about behavior.
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 tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose but lacks behavioral context and differentiation from sibling navigation tools.
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 coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add param details. It adds no extra meaning beyond the schema descriptions, resulting in a baseline score.
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 'Navigate back in history' clearly states the action (navigate back) and resource (history). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like 'forward' and 'goto', though it could be more specific (e.g., 'previous 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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'goto' or 'forward'. The description lacks explicit context for usage conditions or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/shanevcantwell/surf-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server