Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Shipvo

by io.github.shipvo
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

browser_type

Type into a field of the phone browser's page by ref (replaces its content). Returns the new snapshot.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "session": "<session>",
      "ref": "<ref>",
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "browser_type"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
refYesElement ref from browser_snapshot, e.g. e12 or f1e12
textYes
enterNoPress Enter afterwards
sessionYesSession from open_app

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Adds two facts the annotations do not: that the existing field content is replaced (an overwrite behavior, notable given destructiveHint=false) and that a new snapshot is returned. It does not mention focus requirements, whether the field must be visible/editable, or failure behavior.

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?

One tightly packed sentence with the action first, the key overwrite caveat parenthetical, and the return value last. No unnecessary wording.

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 4-parameter browser-input tool with no output schema, the description covers action, targeting, overwrite semantics, and return value. Only edge details like visibility/focus prerequisites or error cases are absent.

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 75% (ref, enter, session documented; text bare). The description supplies the missing meaning for 'text' by stating it replaces the field's content, and 'by ref' reinforces the ref parameter's source (browser_snapshot).

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?

Names a specific verb (type) and resource (a field of the phone browser's page) and scopes it via 'by ref', which implicitly separates it from the native 'type' and 'browser_click' siblings. It never names an alternative explicitly, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Usage is implied: use it to enter text into a browser field identified by a snapshot ref. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance vs. browser_click, native 'type', or when to prefer setting 'enter' vs. pressing a key separately.

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

All Shipvo toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources