WaveXisMCP

wavexis_cookie_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

List browser cookies using optional name, domain, and path filters. Returns cookie details and count for the active session.

Instructions

List browser cookies with optional name, domain, and path filters.

Use wavexis_cookie_get instead when you need a single named cookie.

Side effects: None; reads cookie state from the browser session. Returns: JSON string with keys: 'status' ('ok'/'error'), 'cookies' (list[dict]), 'count' (int).

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_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`input`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedv1.6.25Aug 21, 2026
- addedInput schema / $defs / CookieListInput / properties / domain / description
```
Added value: +"Optional domain filter"
```
- addedInput schema / $defs / CookieListInput / properties / limit / description
```
Added value: +"Maximum number of cookies to return"
```
- addedInput schema / $defs / CookieListInput / properties / name / description
```
Added value: +"Optional cookie name filter"
```
- addedInput schema / $defs / CookieListInput / properties / path / description
```
Added value: +"Optional path filter"
```
- addedInput schema / $defs / CookieListInput / 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?

The description explicitly states that there are no side effects and that it reads cookie state from the browser session, which aligns with and meaningfully supports the readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations. It also previews the JSON return keys, though, since an output schema is present, the return-shape detail provides only modest added value.

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 well front-loaded: action first, then the alternative tool, then side effects and return shape. Every sentence earns its place, with no filler or repetitive content.

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 cookie-listing tool, the definition is solid: it specifies filters, gives a safe alternative, states the lack of side effects, and covers the output shape. Remaining details such as limit defaults and session_id sourcing are present in the schema, so the description is not critically incomplete, though it does not define filter matching semantics.

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 prose names three optional filters (name, domain, path) but does not describe the limit parameter or clarify how multiple filters are combined. With the stated schema description coverage at 0%, the description carries a heavier burden, but it only partially compensates; the nested schema provides the missing details.

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 opens with a precise action-resource statement ('List browser cookies') and names the optional filters: name, domain, and path. It also explicitly differentiates this tool from wavexis_cookie_get, which is the closest sibling, by saying the latter is for a single named cookie.

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?

The description makes the intended usage clear: use this tool to list browser cookies, optionally filtered. It also gives an explicit when-not condition, directing the agent to wavexis_cookie_get when a single named cookie is needed, which removes ambiguity among the cookie-related siblings.

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

Deploy Server