Cookie Consent Audit MCP Server
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| APIFY_TOKEN | Yes | Your Apify API token from console.apify.com/account/integrations. Required for the server to run audits. |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": true
} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| audit_cookie_consentA | Audit one or more websites for cookie consent behavior from an EU address. Each domain is loaded in fresh browser sessions: once before any consent click, once after clicking the reject control on the first layer of the banner, and once with Global Privacy Control on. Returns one row per domain: the consent management platform found (TCF __tcfapi, OneTrust, Cookiebot, Usercentrics, Didomi, and others), whether accept and reject controls sit on the first layer, tracking cookies and requests to known tracker hosts before consent and after the reject, Google Consent Mode denied pings, the GPC comparison and /.well-known/gpc.json, a list of signals, and the version of the fixed tracker list used. Signals for review, not legal findings. Cookie values are never returned. A run that does not succeed is returned as an error with its run ID. Read-only on the audited sites; requires an APIFY_TOKEN and consumes Apify credits per audited domain. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
With only a single tool in the set, there is no possibility of confusing it with another. Its purpose—auditing cookie consent behavior across domains—is stated unambiguously and covers a clear, distinct scope.
The lone tool follows a clean verb_noun snake_case convention (audit_cookie_consent). With one tool there is no opportunity for inconsistent conventions to arise.
A single tool is on the thin side for a server purpose; 3-15 is typically well-scoped. However, the tool is heavily parameterized and performs multi-domain, multi-session batch auditing, so it earns its place rather than being trivial.
The audit itself is thorough, but the surface has a notable gap: the description mentions failed runs are returned 'with its run ID', implying a way to look up or re-fetch run results, yet no such retrieval/list/status tool exists. Agents cannot query past runs or monitor async audits, creating a dead end.