WaveXisMCP

wavexis_cookie_get

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a single cookie by name from an active browser session, with optional domain and path filters. Returns the cookie data or an error status.

Instructions

Retrieve a single cookie by name (and optional domain/path) from the browser.

Use wavexis_cookie_list instead when you need multiple cookies or broad filtering.

Side effects: None; reads cookie state from the browser session. Returns: JSON string with keys: 'status' ('ok'/'error'), 'cookie' (dict|null).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "input": "<input>"
    },
    "name": "wavexis_cookie_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`input`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv1.6.25Aug 21, 2026
- addedInput schema / $defs / CookieGetInput / properties / domain / description
```
Added value: +"Optional domain filter"
```
- addedInput schema / $defs / CookieGetInput / properties / name / description
```
Added value: +"Cookie name to retrieve"
```
- addedInput schema / $defs / CookieGetInput / properties / path / description
```
Added value: +"Optional path filter"
```
- addedInput schema / $defs / CookieGetInput / properties / session_id / description
```
Added value: +"Active session ID from wavexis_session_open"
```
Addedv1.6.24Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already signal readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description reinforces this with 'Side effects: None; reads cookie state' and adds useful behavioral detail about the return shape (status and cookie keys). No annotation contradictions are present.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded: purpose first, usage routing second, then side effects and return format. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundant or filler phrase.

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 simple read-only cookie getter, the description explains behavior, return shape, and sibling routing. The only notable gap is the lack of explicit mention that a valid session_id is required, but the schema covers this, so the context remains sufficient for correct invocation.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The schema already includes helpful descriptions for name, path, domain, and session_id. The description only adds a high-level notion of optional domain/path filtering and does not explain the required session_id dependency. It is adequate but does not meaningfully improve on the schema's parameter documentation.

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 uses a specific verb 'Retrieve' with a concrete resource ('a single cookie by name') and clearly defines the scope ('from the browser', optional domain/path). It also distinguishes this from wavexis_cookie_list, so an agent can tell them apart without opening the schemas.

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?

It explicitly states when to use a sibling tool instead: 'Use wavexis_cookie_list instead when you need multiple cookies or broad filtering.' This gives a clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use condition, leaving little to inference.

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

Deploy Server