clear_cookies
Clear all browser cookies to reset session state or prevent tracking.
Instructions
Clear all cookies
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Clear all browser cookies to reset session state or prevent tracking.
Clear all cookies
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Clear all cookies' is destructive, but the description does not disclose potential side effects, scope (e.g., all domains or current domain), or irreversibility. Barely adequate.
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 extremely concise at three words, with no wasted text. Every word is necessary and directly conveys the tool's purpose.
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 description is minimal but sufficient for a simple parameterless action. However, it could benefit from context like scope (e.g., 'Clears all cookies in the current browser session.') to enhance completeness. An output schema exists but is not required to be explained.
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?
The tool has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (no params). Baseline for 0 params is 4; the description adds no param info, which is acceptable since there are none.
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 'Clear all cookies' uses a specific verb ('Clear') and resource ('all cookies'), clearly indicating the tool's action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'clear_storage' (clears storage) and 'get_cookies' (reads cookies).
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'clear_storage' or 'set_cookie'. The description lacks context about prerequisites or side effects.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/cuber-it/mcp_playwright_tools'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server