Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
WaveXisMCP

WaveXisMCP

by MathiasPaulenko
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

wavexis_backends

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check installed browser backends and versions without launching a browser, so you can verify available engines before starting automation.

Instructions

List installed browser backends and their versions without launching a browser.

Use wavexis_browser_version instead when you need the version of a specific running session's backend.

Side effects: None; queries the local filesystem only. Returns: JSON string with keys: 'status' ('ok'/'error'), 'backends' (dict), 'available' (list[str]).

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": "wavexis_backends"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint), description adds 'Side effects: None; queries the local filesystem only' and 'without launching a browser', giving rich behavioral context that matches 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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, alternative usage, side effects/return. Front-loaded, no wasted words.

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?

Given zero parameters, rich annotations, and output schema, description covers purpose, alternative, side effects, and return format. No gaps.

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?

No parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. Description adds value by explaining the return format (JSON with keys), which is not required due to output schema existence but is helpful. Baseline 4 appropriate.

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 installed browser backends and their versions, using specific verb 'list' and resource 'backends'. It distinguishes from sibling tool 'wavexis_browser_version' by clarifying that sibling is for running sessions.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly provides context for when to use this tool versus wavexis_browser_version, saying 'Use wavexis_browser_version instead when you need the version of a specific running session's backend'. No exclusion needed.

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