Skip to main content
Glama
yfe404

proxy-mcp

by yfe404
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

interceptor_browser_navigate

Navigate a browser page to a URL and optionally pause until the proxy captures matching network traffic, enabling verification of intercepted requests.

Instructions

Navigate the browser target's page via Playwright and optionally wait for matching host traffic to be captured by the proxy.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesDestination URL
target_idYesTarget ID from interceptor_browser_launch
timeout_msNoMax wait for navigation and proxy capture (default: 5000ms)
wait_untilNoPlaywright wait condition (default: domcontentloaded)domcontentloaded
poll_interval_msNoPolling interval while waiting for proxy capture (default: 200ms)
wait_for_proxy_captureNoWait for matching proxy traffic after navigate (default: true)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv3.5.3
    • changedInput schema / properties / target_id / description
      Previous value: -"Target ID from interceptor_browser_launch or interceptor_camoufox_launch"New value: +"Target ID from interceptor_browser_launch"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv3.3.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / target_id / description
      Previous value: -"Target ID from interceptor_browser_launch"New value: +"Target ID from interceptor_browser_launch or interceptor_camoufox_launch"
  3. Addedv2.3.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden but only mentions navigation and optional proxy wait. It omits details on error handling, side effects, or idempotency.

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?

Single sentence, concise and front-loaded with the main action, but could benefit from slight restructuring to highlight key information.

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 6 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks context on behavior, error handling, and parameter interplay, leaving gaps for the agent.

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?

All parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the description adds little extra meaning beyond restating the tool's purpose.

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?

Description clearly states the action (navigate) and resource (browser target's page) using Playwright, and distinguishes from sibling browser tools like close or screenshot.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Description implies usage context (after browser launch, using target_id) but does not explicitly state when to use vs. other tools or conditions that may affect behavior.

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