Skip to main content
Glama

Robot Actions — Remote Device Control

webpage_click

Click an element in the device browser, by CSS selector or by a ref from a page-elements listing — works on BOTH iOS Safari and Android Chrome, auto-detected from the udid. Scrolls the element into view, waits for it to stop moving, and checks it is actually clickable — visible, non-zero-size, enabled, and not covered by anything — retrying until timeoutMs before it gives up. Then taps its center. On iOS the DEVICE taps its own screen at that position, so the page receives a real, fully trusted touch — pointerdown, touchstart, mousedown and click, exactly as from a finger — which also satisfies sites that gate on trusted input. On Android the tap is delivered as a TOUCH through the browser, so elements listening for pointer events respond as well as those listening for click. Falls back to mouse events, then a plain .click(), if a step is unsupported, and the response reports which was used via via. ERRORS rather than reporting success when the element never becomes clickable; pass force:true to skip the checks and dispatch at its coordinates anyway — which works for anything that still occupies a box, but NOT for a display:none or zero-size element, where there is no point to aim at and force fails too. When a selector matches several elements the first VISIBLE one wins, not the first in document order. This is COORDINATE-based. Android events are synthesized by the browser (isTrusted:false); iOS taps are real device input (isTrusted:true) whenever via comes back as "nativeTap".

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
refNoElement ref from a page-elements listing, e.g. "e12". Provide this or `selector`. A ref points straight at the element it was issued for, so it survives markup that shifted position, and it can address elements no CSS selector can reach from the top of the page.
udidYesDevice UDID / serial (iOS or Android)
forceNoSkip the clickability checks and dispatch at the element center regardless (default: false). Use only when the checks are wrong about a target you know is clickable — it restores the old behaviour, where a click on a hidden or covered element reports success without doing anything. Needs a center to aim at, so it still fails on a display:none or zero-size element; it does apply to visibility:hidden, opacity:0, pointer-events:none, disabled, off-viewport, and covered targets.
pageIdNoTarget page/tab id — auto-picked when omitted
socketNoAndroid only: abstract unix socket name (default: chrome_devtools_remote)
selectorNoCSS selector for the target element. Provide this or `ref`.
snapshotNoAppend a webpage_snapshot of the resulting page (actionable elements only) so you can see what the click changed without a second call (default: false)
timeoutMsNoHow long to keep retrying while the element is not yet clickable (default: 5000, max: 30000)
pointerTypeNoHow the tap is delivered. You rarely need this — the default is the best path each platform has (a real device tap on iOS, a browser touch on Android). "touch" is what a finger produces and drives elements that listen for pointer events, which many component libraries bind. On Android a touch also produces mousedown/mouseup unless a handler cancels pointerdown or touchstart — and when one does, click is suppressed too, which is when "mouse" is the way through. "mouse" sends mouse events only, and on iOS it opts OUT of the device tap in favour of the browser-level path, which delivers only mouseup+click and is not trusted. The response reports which was used via `via`.
platformVersionNoIgnored (kept for compatibility)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed7 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / force
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Skip the clickability checks and dispatch at the element center regardless (default: false). Use only when the checks are wrong about a target you know is clickable — it restores the old behaviour, where a click on a hidden or covered element reports success without doing anything. Needs a center to aim at, so it still fails on a display:none or zero-size element; it does apply to visibility:hidden, opacity:0, pointer-events:none, disabled, off-viewport, and covered targets.",
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / pointerType
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "How the tap is delivered. You rarely need this — the default is the best path each platform has (a real device tap on iOS, a browser touch on Android). \"touch\" is what a finger produces and drives elements that listen for pointer events, which many component libraries bind. On Android a touch also produces mousedown/mouseup unless a handler cancels pointerdown or touchstart — and when one does, click is suppressed too, which is when \"mouse\" is the way through. \"mouse\" sends mouse events only, and on iOS it opts OUT of the device tap in favour of the browser-level path, which delivers only mouseup+click and is not trusted. The response reports which was used via `via`.",
      +  "enum": [
      +    "touch",
      +    "mouse"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / ref
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Element ref from a page-elements listing, e.g. \"e12\". Provide this or `selector`. A ref points straight at the element it was issued for, so it survives markup that shifted position, and it can address elements no CSS selector can reach from the top of the page.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedInput schema / properties / selector / description
      Previous value: -"CSS selector for the element to click"New value: +"CSS selector for the target element. Provide this or `ref`."
    • addedInput schema / properties / snapshot
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Append a webpage_snapshot of the resulting page (actionable elements only) so you can see what the click changed without a second call (default: false)",
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / timeoutMs
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "How long to keep retrying while the element is not yet clickable (default: 5000, max: 30000)",
      +  "maximum": 30000,
      +  "minimum": 0,
      +  "type": "integer"
      +}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "udid",
      -  "selector"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "udid"
      +]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and excels: it discloses the scroll-into-view, wait-for-stable, clickability checks, retry logic, platform-specific delivery (nativeTap on iOS vs synthesized touch on Android), fallback to mouse/.click(), error behavior, force semantics with edge cases, and first-visible-element selection. No contradictions exist with annotations (none present).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a dense paragraph with high information density, but it is not concise; it is a wall of text that could benefit from bullet points or more structured breakdown. The main purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, but the lengthy technical details on iOS/Android differences and fallbacks make it less scannable. Every sentence adds value, but the overall length impacts readability.

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 tool of this complexity (10 params, no output schema), the description covers most needed context: platform behavior, error cases, targeting, and the `via` field in the response. It lacks explicit detail on the full response structure (e.g., success status, snapshot output) but hints at it. The description is robust given the tool's complexity, though a brief note on the response format would make it complete.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds substantial meaning beyond the schema: it explains when to prefer ref over selector (survives layout shifts, addresses unreachable elements), nuances of force:true (what it still fails on), pointerType behavior (touch vs mouse, trust implications), and timeoutMs semantics. This goes well beyond the baseline 3 for high coverage.

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 precise action (click an element in the device browser) with clear targeting methods (CSS selector or ref) and explicitly scopes to both iOS Safari and Android Chrome. It distinguishes itself from siblings like device_tap or web_click by specifying 'device browser' and auto-detection from udid, making it unambiguous what resource it operates on.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides context on when to use the tool: for browser elements on mobile, with real device taps on iOS and browser touch on Android. It explains the coordinate-based nature and the force:true option for skipping checks. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools (e.g., device_tap for native taps) or state when not to use it, so the guidance is clear but not explicit on exclusions.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources