Navigate the current API URL path like a directory to switch endpoints, move into subpaths, or go up a level during an interactive HTTP session.
Navigates the API URL path like a directory (e.g., 'cd /api/v1', 'cd users', 'cd ..').
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes | Relative or absolute API path | |
| session_id | No | default |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The 'cd' analogy implies a persistent state change, but it never states that the new path is retained for the session (the session_id parameter hints at this) or that it affects subsequent calls. It discloses the mental model but omits side-effect, persistence, and error behavior.
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 embedded examples. Nothing wasted and nothing buried.
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 tool that mutates navigation state within a session, with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented session_id, the description is only minimum viable. It conveys the model but not the state semantics or how the changed path interacts with other 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 50%: 'path' is documented in the schema and the description adds useful format examples ('cd /api/v1', 'cd users', 'cd ..'), but 'session_id' is undocumented in both schema and description, leaving the session-scoping semantics ambiguous.
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 action (navigating/changing the API URL path) and anchors it to a familiar mental model ('like a directory'), backed by concrete path examples. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like http_prompt_execute or http_prompt_init.
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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and no alternative tool is named. The agent must infer from the cd analogy that this sets a working path before calling http_prompt_execute.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.