Skip to main content
Glama
chrome-dev-mcp

chrome-dev-mcp

resume_execution

Destructive

Resume paused execution until the next breakpoint or pause, returning immediately. Set terminate to skip the rest of the paused function and callers when stopping endless loops.

Instructions

Resume execution while paused; it runs until the next breakpoint or pause. Returns at once rather than waiting for one.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
terminateNoResume, but skip the rest of the paused function and of its callers, finally blocks included, e.g. to stop an endless loop. The page may be left half-updated; reload_tab gives a clean state.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.0.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / terminate
      Added value: +{
      +  "default": false,
      +  "description": "Resume, but skip the rest of the paused function and of its callers, finally blocks included, e.g. to stop an endless loop. The page may be left half-updated; reload_tab gives a clean state.",
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
  2. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Adds real value beyond the sparse annotations: it discloses that the call is non-blocking ('returns at once rather than waiting'), which is critical for an agent's control flow, and implies a paused-state prerequisite. It omits what happens if the debugger is not paused, and with only destructiveHint=true in annotations the description could say more about side effects of resuming.

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?

Two tight sentences, no waste, with the core behavior (runs to next breakpoint) and the non-blocking contract front-loaded. Every clause earns its place.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a one-parameter tool with no output schema, the essentials are present, but the description never says what a resume returns (e.g. resulting debugger state or pause location) or how it fails when not paused. With thin annotations, a bit more behavioral context would complete the picture.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single 'terminate' parameter is documented richly in the schema itself (half-updated page, reload_tab remediation). The description adds nothing about parameters, so baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Specific verb+resource ('Resume execution') plus the scope of the resume ('runs until the next breakpoint or pause'), which implicitly distinguishes it from the single-step siblings like step_over/step_into. It stops short of naming those siblings, so the differentiation must be inferred.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

'While paused' implies the precondition, so an agent can infer when the tool is applicable. However, it never states which sibling to use instead for single-stepping (step_over, step_into, step_out) or that pause_execution is the inverse, leaving the choice unguided.

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