Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-stealth-chrome

mcp-stealth-chrome

by RobithYusuf
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

wait_for_response

Wait for a network response that matches a regex URL pattern. Configure timeout for sync with network events.

Instructions

Wait for a network response whose URL matches regex.

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": {
      "url_pattern": "<url_pattern>"
    },
    "name": "wait_for_response"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
url_patternYes
timeoutNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.12

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention blocking nature, timeout handling, what happens on no match, or return value (despite output schema existing). Minimal behavioral context.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words. Front-loaded with action and key condition.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity of a conditional wait tool (blocking, timeout, matching logic), the description is too sparse. It omits crucial details like whether it returns the matched response, what happens on timeout, and how regex matching works exactly. Sibling tools suggest many wait variants, but no differentiation is provided.

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 adds 'URL matches regex' context to url_pattern, which is helpful beyond the bare schema. However, the timeout parameter (with default 15) is completely undocumented, and schema coverage is 0%.

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 (wait), resource (network response), and condition (URL matches regex). It distinguishes from siblings like wait_for_request (waits for request) and wait_for_navigation.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to wait for request instead). No mention of preconditions, timeout behavior, or when not to use.

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