Import.io

Select Change Action

importio_action_select_change

Change the selected option of a element inside an importio_play_action pipeline; fields carries the upstream SelectChangeAction configuration with the target element and value. Selecting an option directly is more reliable than clicking through dropdown UI. For text inputs use importio_action_input_change.

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": {
      "fields": "<fields>"
    },
    "name": "importio_action_select_change"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`input`	No	Optional second playAction argument forwarded after the envelope; omit it unless the upstream action expects one.
`fields`	Yes	Action-specific configuration forwarded into the action envelope; each tool description states what it should contain where that contract is documented, otherwise it names the upstream configuration fields carries.
`optional`	No	Flag forwarded into the action envelope; omit it unless the upstream action documents it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedNov 9, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / fields / description

Added value: +"Action-specific configuration forwarded into the action envelope; each tool description states what it should contain where that contract is documented, otherwise it names the upstream configuration fields carries."

addedInput schema / properties / input / description

Added value: +"Optional second playAction argument forwarded after the envelope; omit it unless the upstream action expects one."

addedInput schema / properties / optional / description

Added value: +"Flag forwarded into the action envelope; omit it unless the upstream action documents it."

First observedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the mutation profile (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false), so the description need not restate safety. It adds the pipeline context and the reliability rationale, but says nothing about whether change/input events are dispatched, what happens if the option is absent, or whether the element must be visible/enabled.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the operation and scope, then the rationale, then the sibling escape hatch. No filler and every sentence carries decision-relevant information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is a thin passthrough envelope with a nested object, no output schema and three parameters; the description covers the intent and the sibling split adequately. The remaining gap is the fields contract itself — exact keys, selector format, and value typing are only loosely gestured at ('target element and value'), leaving the agent to infer the upstream schema.

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 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning by stating that fields carries the upstream SelectChangeAction configuration including the target element and value, which the schema's generic 'action-specific configuration' wording does not. It still does not give the concrete key names or value formats for that payload.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Change the selected option of a <select> element") plus the execution context (inside an importio_play_action pipeline), which no sibling name alone conveys. It also implicitly scopes itself against importio_action_click and importio_action_keyboard by naming the direct-selection approach.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: use this for <select> elements because it is more reliable than clicking through dropdown UI, and use importio_action_input_change for text inputs. Both the preferred path and the alternative with its selecting condition are named.

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

All Import.io tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?