Open Make.com URLs like scenario editor links directly in your default browser for quick access.
Open a Make.com URL (e.g. a scenario editor link) in the default browser on the user's computer.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | The URL to open |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions opening in default browser but does not disclose potential limitations (e.g., requires browser, headless environments). For a simple action, it is adequately transparent but could improve.
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, clear sentence (18 words) with no wasted words. It is well-structured and front-loaded.
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?
Given the simplicity of the tool and the presence of many sibling tools, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose. No output schema is needed, but a brief note on when to use this over API-based tools would enhance completeness.
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% and the description adds value by specifying the URL type ('Make.com URL, e.g., scenario editor link'), which goes beyond the schema's generic 'The URL to open'.
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 clearly states the action (open URL in browser), the resource (Make.com URL), and provides an example (scenario editor link). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that fetch data or control scenarios.
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 description implies usage context (opening UI links) but does not explicitly state when to use or not use this tool, nor does it mention alternatives among siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.