Robot Actions — Remote Device Control

webpage_type

Type text into an input/textarea in the device browser, by CSS selector or by a ref from a page-elements listing — works on BOTH iOS Safari and Android Chrome. On iOS it taps the field and types on the DEVICE keyboard, so the page gets real trusted keystrokes (keydown, keypress, beforeinput, input) exactly as from a person — use this for anything that reacts to typing rather than just reading .value. Otherwise it sets the value via the native HTMLInputElement/HTMLTextAreaElement value setter (so React/Vue-controlled inputs register the change) and dispatches bubbling input and change events, which are isTrusted:false. The response reports which happened via via ("nativeKeyboard" or "jsValue"), and when it fell back to jsValue it names the cause in fallbackReason — you never have to guess whether a degraded path was taken. Pass require:"native" to make an unavailable device keyboard a hard error instead of a silent downgrade, for fields that only behave correctly under real keystrokes. exact:false means the keystrokes landed but the component rewrote the value as you typed (masks, autocompletes) — that is a success, not a failure. By default appends to the existing value; pass clear:true to replace it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ref`	No	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.
`text`	Yes	Text to type
`udid`	Yes	Device UDID / serial (iOS or Android)
`clear`	No	Replace the existing value instead of appending (default: false)
`pageId`	No	Target page/tab id — auto-picked when omitted
`socket`	No	Android only: abstract unix socket name (default: chrome_devtools_remote)
`require`	No	Set to "native" to fail loudly when the device keyboard is unavailable, instead of silently falling back to setting .value (isTrusted:false). Use for fields that gate on real keystrokes. iOS only — Android has no native-keyboard path here.
`selector`	No	CSS selector for the target element. Provide this or `ref`.
`platformVersion`	No	Ignored (kept for compatibility)

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It transparently explains the exact behavior on iOS (taps field, types on device keyboard with trusted keystrokes) and Android (sets value via JS setter with isTrusted:false events). It details fallback reporting via `via` and `fallbackReason`, and clarifies that `exact:false` is a success case. This is exceptionally thorough.

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?

The description is a single dense paragraph, but every sentence is valuable and adds unique information. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and key differentiators. While it could benefit from bullet points for readability, it remains concise without wasted words, earning a 4 rather than 5.

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 tool with 9 parameters, two platforms, complex fallback logic, and no output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: platform-specific behavior, fallback reporting, parameter effects, and response fields. It addresses edge cases (e.g., `exact:false` as success, `require:"native"` for iOS only) and explains the `socket` parameter. No gaps remain.

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?

All 9 parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), but the description adds significant meaning beyond schema: it explains the behavioral impact of `clear`, `require`, and `exact`, the relationship between `ref` and `selector`, and the `socket` parameter's Android-only nature. This goes well beyond what the schema alone provides.

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 clearly states the tool types text into an input/textarea in the device browser using CSS selector or ref. It explicitly differentiates from siblings by specifying cross-platform behavior (iOS Safari and Android Chrome) and the mechanism (native keyboard vs. JS value setter), which distinguishes it from web-only or single-platform typing tools.

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 clear guidance on when to use this tool: for fields that react to typing rather than just reading .value. It also explains when to use the `require:"native"` option for fields needing real keystrokes and the meaning of `exact:false`. While it doesn't explicitly name alternative sibling tools, the context of device browser vs. other typing tools is implied and sufficient.

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

All Robot Actions — Remote Device Control tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

The set contains near-identical duplicate families: web_* and playwright_* expose ~15 pairs of the same desktop-grid-browser operations (web_get_text/playwright_get_text, web_reload/playwright_reload), and screenshot/log/network/mock capabilities each have 5-8 entry points (device_screenshot vs android_mjpeg_screenshot vs ios_screenshot vs ios_fast_screenshot vs web_screenshot vs webpage_screenshot vs session_screenshot). Many individual descriptions carefully draw boundaries (devtools vs traffic, HID vs session), but an agent cannot reliably distinguish web_* from playwright_*, and ios_screenshot/ios_fast_screenshot/ios_mjpeg_screenshot blur together.

Naming Consistency2/5

The prefix scheme is broken: Android functionality is split arbitrarily between android_* and device_* (device_screenshot vs android_mjpeg_screenshot), the desktop browser gets two parallel prefixes (web_* and playwright_*), and verbs vary across equivalents (device_navigate_url vs web_navigate vs ios_safari_navigate). session_* uses bare verbs (session_url, session_back), and the same concept gets different names (ios_clipboard_get_hid vs ios_get_pasteboard; device_screen vs ios_orientation).

Tool Count1/5

333 tools is an extreme count by any measure — far beyond the 50+ threshold — and much of the bulk is duplicative (the web_*/playwright_* pairs alone double ~15 slots) or out-of-scope for a device-control server (TestRail, Jira, AzDO, agent memory, secret variables, feedback). Even granting that remote device control + test automation is a broad domain, this surface will devastate agent context budgets and is impossible to navigate coherently.

Completeness4/5

The core device-control and test-automation domain is remarkably thorough: Android and iOS each have full interaction, app-lifecycle, file, network/proxy, performance, crash, accessibility, recording, and replay coverage, with CRUD lifecycles for flows, suites, app uploads, TestRail cases, and visual-review baselines. Minor gaps exist at the margins — Jira/AzDO lack update/transition/comment operations, and iOS cannot open/close tabs — but the central workflows have no dead ends.

Resources

Need Help?