Skip to main content
Glama
seleniumbase

seleniumbase-mcp

Official
by seleniumbase
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python
Local

wait_seconds

Pause automation for a specified number of seconds. Use for simple timing delays; prefer wait_for when waiting for an element or text to appear or disappear.

Instructions

Block the MCP server for a fixed number of seconds.

This is a low-level timing tool. It performs no browser action while waiting and should not be used when waiting for a page condition.

Prefer wait_for when waiting for an element or text to appear/disappear, because wait_for can return as soon as the requested condition is met.

Args: seconds: Number of seconds to block. May be an integer or float.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
secondsYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.2.5
    • removedInput schema / properties / seconds / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "integer"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  }
-]
    • addedInput schema / properties / seconds / type
      Added value: +"number"
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.2.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / seconds / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "number"
+  }
+]
    • removedInput schema / properties / seconds / type
      Removed value: -"number"
  3. Addedv1.2.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the blocking behavior, the fact that no browser action occurs, and the fixed-duration nature. It does not mention potential side effects like all MCP requests being blocked or whether the wait is absolute, but the core behavior is transparent.

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 compact and well-organized: a one-sentence core definition, a brief explanatory paragraph on usage, and an Args section. Every sentence contributes value, with the most important statement front-loaded and no redundant filler.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and an output schema present, the description covers the essential purpose, usage constraints, and parameter semantics. It could add a caution about the impact of long blocking times, but the 'Block the MCP server' phrasing already implies this, and the output schema handles return-value information.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the one parameter. It does so by defining 'seconds' as 'Number of seconds to block' and clarifying 'May be an integer or float,' which adds unit, type flexibility, and meaning beyond the bare schema type. It stops short of specifying bounds or validation rules, but for a single-parameter tool this is strong.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Block the MCP server for a fixed number of seconds.' It immediately differentiates itself from sibling wait_for by labeling itself a 'low-level timing tool' that performs no browser action, making its scope clear.

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?

Explicit when-not-to-use guidance is provided: 'should not be used when waiting for a page condition' and 'Prefer wait_for when waiting for an element or text to appear/disappear, because wait_for can return as soon as the requested condition is met.' This clearly routes an agent between the two wait tools.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/seleniumbase/seleniumbase-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server