WaveXisMCP

wavexis_stop

Idempotent

Stop all pending navigations and resource loads in an active browser session. Cancels hanging page loads by aborting in-flight network requests, leaving the page in its current partial state.

Instructions

Stop all pending navigations and resource loads in the session.

Use when a page load is hanging or no longer needed; use wavexis_wait to wait for a load to complete instead.

Side effects: Aborts in-flight network requests and pending navigations; the page is left in its current partial state. Returns: JSON string with keys: 'status' ('ok'/'error').

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_stop"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`input`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.1Jul 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds valuable behavioral context: 'Side effects: Aborts in-flight network requests and pending navigations; the page is left in its current partial state.' No contradiction.

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?

Four concise sentences with no fluff: purpose, usage guidance, side effects, and return format. Well-structured and efficient.

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 the tool's simplicity, the description covers all needed aspects: purpose, when to use, side effects, and return format. The output schema is mentioned implicitly by describing the return format. Fully complete for this context.

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 description does not mention the session_id parameter, but the input schema provides a description ('Active session ID'). With 0% schema coverage reported, the description could have added value, but the schema compensates. Score is baseline as schema covers the parameter.

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 action ('Stop all pending navigations and resource loads in the session') using a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from the sibling tool wavexis_wait.

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 tells when to use this tool ('when a page load is hanging or no longer needed') and when not to (use wavexis_wait instead), providing clear usage context.

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

Deploy Server