Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@nxavis/agent-browser-mcp

@nxavis/agent-browser-mcp

by softallice
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

browser_get_console

Retrieve browser console messages using a session ID to debug JavaScript errors and monitor page activity.

Instructions

Get console messages from the browser

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_console"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sessionIdNoBrowser session ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get console messages' with no mention of side effects, return format, whether messages are cleared, or any permissions needed. This is a significant gap for a tool that might affect browser state.

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?

The description is a single, direct sentence with no redundant information. It is front-loaded and wastes no words, making it highly concise.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given there is no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., a list of messages, format, source), but it does not. It also lacks any context about the nature of console messages or typical use cases, making it incomplete for an agent to use correctly.

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 input schema has one parameter, sessionId, with a 'Browser session ID' description, yielding 100% schema coverage. The description does not add any extra meaning for the parameter, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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?

The description uses a clear verb 'Get' with a specific resource 'console messages from the browser', which distinguishes it from sibling tools that handle navigation, clicks, or other browser interactions. It is clear enough, though it could specify the types of console messages (e.g., logs, errors, warnings).

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. It simply states what it does, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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