Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
CDPM

CDPM

by IGELHARINE
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Answer permission bubble

browser_permission

Lists pending Chrome permission prompts and presses the exact button name to answer them, unblocking pages that wait.

Instructions

Lists or answers Chrome permission bubbles ("site wants to: access other apps and services on this device / show notifications / know your location…"). They are browser UI: not in snapshot/screenshot, page tools can't click them, and the page often waits until they are answered. The header warns when one is open. Without button: shows the open bubbles with their exact button names. With button: presses that button (exact name as listed, e.g. "허용", "Allow", "Block", "Allow while visiting the site"). Windows, windowed slots only.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteNoOnly when several bubbles are open: part of the bubble title (e.g. the site host) to pick one
slotYesBrowser slot 1-30. "3", "slot 3", "browser 3" → 3. If the user gives a port like 14052, subtract 14049.
agentNoYour display name, shown to other agents. Subagents must always set it. Default "claude-1e1b".
buttonNoExact button name to press, as listed in the header or by calling without button
multiSlotNotrue only when one agent must handle several slots together (e.g. comparing). Normally omit (one agent = one slot; use subagents for the rest)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.10
    • changedInput schema / properties / agent / description
      Previous value: -"Your display name, shown to other agents. Subagents must always set it. Default \"claude-68d9\"."New value: +"Your display name, shown to other agents. Subagents must always set it. Default \"claude-1e1b\"."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and delivers real behavioral context: bubbles are browser UI absent from snapshot/screenshot, page tools cannot click them, and the page often blocks until they are answered. It also discloses a platform constraint ('Windows, windowed slots only'). It stops short of describing reversibility or failure modes when a button name doesn't match, keeping it from a 5.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loads what the tool does, then why it exists, then the two modes. Dense but every sentence carries information; the inline examples and Korean sample add real utility rather than padding. Slightly long but not wasteful.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, it covers the essentials: what appears when no button is passed, how to answer, and the platform limitation. The main missing piece is disambiguation from browser_dialog, which would make it fully self-sufficient.

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?

Schema coverage is already 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine value: it defines the two-mode contract for button (list first, then press the exact name as shown) and gives multilingual button-name examples. It reinforces the site selector's purpose in choosing among multiple open bubbles.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific pair of verbs (lists/answers) on a precise resource (Chrome permission bubbles) and clarifies scope with the 'site wants to:' example. It partly distinguishes itself by noting that page tools can't click these, but it never names the closest sibling, browser_dialog, so an agent must infer the split. Clear purpose, incomplete sibling differentiation.

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?

Explains the trigger context ('the header warns when one is open') and the two invocation modes (omit button to enumerate, supply button to press), giving solid when-to-use guidance. It lacks explicit exclusions or routing versus the browser_dialog sibling, which handles adjacent dialog UI.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools