Skip to main content
Glama
raultov

chrome-debug-mcp

by raultov
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussions(1)Admin
Rust
Local

webmcp_list_invocations

List WebMCP tool invocations from the current Chrome session to check their status, identify requests awaiting user consent, or recover a lost invocation ID.

Instructions

Lists all WebMCP tool invocations from this Chrome session with their current status. Side effects: none (read-only state access). Returns: JSON array with toolName, frameId, input, and status ('Pending', 'Completed', 'Error', or 'Canceled') for each invocation. Use this to find invocations that are waiting for user consent on the page (status 'Pending') or to recover an invocationId after losing it. Alternatives: webmcp_get_invocation for a single invocation by id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusNoOptional filter: only return invocations with this status. Constraints: one of 'Pending', 'Completed', 'Error', 'Canceled'. Defaults to: None (all invocations).
tab_idNoThe Tab ID of the target tab. Omit to use the active tab.
instance_idNoChrome instance id from open_instance/list_instances. Omit for the default instance.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.3.2
    • removedInput schema / properties / instance_id / nullable
      Removed value: -true
    • removedInput schema / properties / status / nullable
      Removed value: -true
    • removedInput schema / properties / tab_id / nullable
      Removed value: -true
  2. Addedv1.0.11

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states 'Side effects: none (read-only state access)' and describes the return format (JSON array with fields and statuses). It does not mention potential errors or performance, but for a read-only list operation this is sufficient.

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?

Three sentences with zero filler. The purpose and side effects are front-loaded, the return format is given, and the alternatives are at the end. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a read-only list tool with three optional parameters fully described in the schema, the description covers the return format, use cases, and alternative. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 parameters (status, tab_id, instance_id) are already documented. The description does not add additional semantics beyond what the schema provides; it simply references the status filter implicitly. Baseline 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?

States a specific verb ('Lists') with a clear resource ('all WebMCP tool invocations') and scope ('from this Chrome session'). Explicitly names the alternative (webmcp_get_invocation) and the differentiator (single by id vs. all), so an agent can distinguish without opening schemas.

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?

Gives explicit use cases: find invocations waiting for user consent (status 'Pending') and recover a lost invocationId. Also names the alternative tool and when to use it. No ambiguity about when this tool is appropriate.

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