Skip to main content
Glama

Session Save

session_save

Save encrypted cookies and localStorage per domain and name after login so you can restore the session later with session_load.

Instructions

Save cookies+localStorage encrypted (Fernet+PBKDF2-200k). Per-(domain,name). Run AFTER login on target tab. Reuse via session_load.

Ex: session_save('t0', 'github-me', 'hunter2') → {"path":"~/.local/share/umbra/sessions/github.com/github-me.fern"}

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "tab_id": "<tab_id>",
      "name": "<name>",
      "passphrase": "<passphrase>"
    },
    "name": "session_save"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
tab_idYes
passphraseYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that data is encrypted with Fernet/PBKDF2-200k, that sessions are scoped per (domain,name), and the resulting file path. It omits whether an existing session with the same name is overwritten, what happens on a wrong/weak passphrase, and whether the tab must be on the target domain.

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?

Four short lines, front-loaded with the core action, followed by the timing constraint and a concrete example. Nothing is redundant.

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

Completeness4/5

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

An output schema exists so return values need no prose, and the example still shows the path shape. For a write operation taking a passphrase with no annotations, the missing overwrite and error semantics are the only meaningful gap.

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 0% and the schema gives only types, so the description must compensate. The example session_save('t0','github-me','hunter2') implicitly fixes the argument order and hints that tab_id looks like 't0' and that name is the session label, but it never defines tab_id format or name uniqueness rules.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (save cookies+localStorage) plus scope (per-domain,name) and the encryption mechanism. It is clearly distinct from session_load/session_list/session_delete siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly says to run AFTER login on the target tab and points to session_load for reuse. The condition that selects this tool versus its session siblings is stated outright.

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