Skip to main content
Glama
frsorrentino

Chrome Bridge

by frsorrentino
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

cookie_audit

Idempotent

Audits cookie and consent-banner behavior by clearing site cookies, reloading, and recording requests before and after accepting the banner to reveal trackers contacted prior to consent.

Instructions

Cookie and consent-banner audit: clears this site's cookies, reloads, records cookies and third-party requests BEFORE consent, accepts the banner, records again; the findings name the trackers contacted before consent. Logs you out of the audited site.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tab_idNoTarget tab; omitted = last tab navigated in this session, else the active one
settle_msNoWait after load and after consent, for late beacons
accept_selectorNoAccept button of the banner; omitted = dismiss_overlays; "none" skips consent

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.16.1

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (idempotent, non-destructive), the description explicitly discloses the side effects: clearing cookies, accepting the banner, and logging out. This transparency about state changes exceeds what the annotations alone convey.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single run-on sentence but is rich with relevant detail. It front-loads the purpose and follows a logical sequence. Slightly dense, but not verbose—allocating a 4 for clarity and efficiency.

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?

The description covers the full workflow, expected output (findings naming trackers), and side effects (logout). With no output schema, this textual explanation sufficiently equips an agent to understand the tool's behavior and results.

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 schema already provides full descriptions for all three parameters (coverage 100%). The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the tool's specific function: a cookie and consent-banner audit. It lists the sequence of actions (clear cookies, reload, record before consent, accept banner, record again) and explicitly notes the logout side effect, making the intended purpose unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description implies the tool is used when auditing tracker behavior before and after consent, and it warns about the logout effect. It does not explicitly compare against alternatives like the generic 'audit' tool, but the specific scenario is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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