Export cookies for the current domain to bypass logins later.
Export cookies for the current domain to bypass logins later.
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": "browser_session_export"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions exporting cookies but does not disclose what the output is (e.g., file path, string) or any side effects like clearing cookies. The behavior is partially clear but lacks detail on return values or state changes.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's core purpose. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, with no unnecessary words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool has no output schema, and the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., cookie data, file). An agent needs to know how to use the result, especially since there is a sibling import tool. This gap makes the description incomplete for effective invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
There are zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter info, but with no parameters, the baseline is 4. The description does not contradict the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool exports cookies for the current domain to bypass logins. It uses a specific verb ('export') and resource ('cookies for the current domain'), and distinguishes from siblings like 'browser_session_import' which handles the reverse operation.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage for saving login state by exporting cookies, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. The sibling browser_session_import provides context, but the description itself offers no guidance on when to prefer this over other tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.