Skip to main content
Glama

browser_get_cache_storage

Inspect Service Worker and PWA CacheStorage caches via CDP to list cached endpoints and decode responses, helping debug offline behavior and stale cached data.

Instructions

Inspect Service Worker and PWA CacheStorage caches, cached endpoints, and responses via CDP.

Tool call template

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_get_cache_storage"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of cached entries to return per cache
cache_nameNoOptional name of a specific cache to inspect
include_response_bodyNoWhether to fetch and decode cached response bodies

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.12.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only hints at read-only intent through 'Inspect'. It says nothing about whether a browser session/page must exist, whether Service Workers must be registered, the cost of fetching and decoding response bodies, or result truncation via the limit.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though the space saved is spent on nothing that would guide selection.

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 three-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description should at least sketch the returned shape (cache names, entry URLs, response metadata) and the preconditions for use. It only names the CDP mechanism, leaving the agent to discover the rest.

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 description coverage is 100%, so limit, cache_name, and include_response_body are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning such as name-matching behavior or the implications of enabling body decoding.

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 ('Inspect') plus a precise resource: Service Worker and PWA CacheStorage caches, cached endpoints, and responses, retrieved via CDP. It does not distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as browser_get_storage or browser_get_indexeddb, so an agent must infer which storage layer to pick.

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 statement of when to use this instead of browser_get_storage, browser_get_indexeddb, browser_get_cookies, or browser_clear_storage. Usage is only implied by the resource name, and no prerequisites (e.g. an active page with a registered Service Worker) are mentioned.

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