gecko-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_cookies

Read-only

Lists cookies from the current browser tab, redacting session token values. Pass includeValues:true to retrieve raw values for debugging.

Instructions

SENSITIVE: list cookies visible to the current page. Values (session tokens!) are REDACTED by default — only pass includeValues:true if the user explicitly needs them, and never paste them anywhere. Active tab unless browserId given.

Tool call template

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": "get_cookies"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`browserId`	No	Target tab. Defaults to active.
`includeValues`	No	Include raw cookie values (session tokens — highly sensitive). Default: false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.2.4Jun 20, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), the description adds critical context: cookies are sensitive, values are redacted by default, and includeValues requires user permission. No contradiction with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two concise sentences front-loaded with 'SENSITIVE:' warning. No wasted words; every sentence adds essential information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read operation with two optional parameters and good annotations, the description fully covers behavioral context (redaction, sensitivity) and usage conditions. No missing critical information.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Input schema already describes both parameters (100% coverage). The description reinforces and adds usage nuance—emphasizing sensitivity of includeValues and default behavior—providing value beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool lists cookies visible to the current page, using specific verb 'list' and resource 'cookies'. It is distinct from sibling tools like click, navigate, etc., which are unrelated actions.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides clear guidance on when to use includeValues (only if user explicitly needs them) and warns not to paste values. Mentions default behavior (active tab unless browserId given). Could be improved with explicit when-not-to-use scenarios relative to siblings, but the domain is unique.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.