ReMCP

Browser Workflow

browser_workflow

Destructive

Use this for an explicitly requested sequence of 1–12 guarded DOM actions and bounded waits on one inspected Chromium page. Validate CSS selectors first. The workflow cannot run arbitrary JavaScript, upload files, switch origins or implicitly submit a form; an explicit click may submit data or cause irreversible remote changes. Stop at the first failed step and never echo field values.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`steps`	Yes	Workflow on one page: explicit CSS actions and bounded waits, max 12 seconds. Never silently submits; click must be explicit.
`title`	No	Choose a page whose title contains this text.
`device`	Yes	ReMCP device id returned by list_devices. Required for every device operation.
`endpoint`	No	Loopback Chrome DevTools endpoint. Defaults to REMCP_CDP_URL or http://127.0.0.1:9222.
`target_id`	No	Page target id returned by browser_tabs.
`timeout_ms`	No	Timeout in milliseconds.
`url_contains`	No	Choose a page whose URL contains this text.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No	Browser element action structured result for browser_action. Stable fields are declared explicitly; platform-specific fields may be added. Large results may return truncated/bytes/preview instead of the full payload.
`text`	Yes	Concise human-readable result of the tool call.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 25, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / steps / items / properties / fields / items / properties / expected_tag

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional HTML tag from Forms; rejects stale selector mismatches.",
+  "enum": [
+    "input",
+    "select",
+    "textarea"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / steps / items / properties / fields / items / properties / expected_type

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional field type from Forms; checked immediately before batch writes.",
+  "enum": [
+    "text",
+    "email",
+    "password",
+    "tel",
+    "url",
+    "search",
+    "number",
+    "date",
+    "time",
+    "datetime-local",
+    "month",
+    "week",
+    "color",
+    "range",
+    "checkbox",
+    "radio",
+    "file",
+    "hidden",
+    "submit",
+    "reset",
+    "button",
+    "select",
+    "textarea"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

AddedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: failure semantics ('stop at the first failed step'), the 12-second execution bound, the irreversible-remote-change risk from an explicit click, and the privacy rule 'never echo field values'. These are behavioral facts an agent cannot get from readOnlyHint/destructiveHint alone, and they are consistent with destructiveHint=true.

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?

Front-loaded with the usage trigger, then constraints, then failure behavior; four dense sentences with no filler. Sentences are long and pack multiple rules each, which costs a bit of scanability.

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?

An output schema exists and annotations carry the safety profile, so the description only needs to cover scope, limits and failure handling — which it does completely: size bound, time bound, banned operations, stop-on-first-failure, and data-handling rule.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the steps array, action enum, fields guards and timeout_ms are already fully documented. The description adds only framing value — 'guarded' hints at expected_tag/expected_type and '1–12' restates maxItems — without explaining value/text/condition semantics beyond the schema.

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?

States a concrete verb and resource: a batched 'sequence of 1–12 guarded DOM actions and bounded waits on one inspected Chromium page'. The batching bound implicitly separates it from the atomic browser_click/browser_fill_form/browser_wait siblings, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

'Use this for an explicitly requested sequence' sets the triggering condition, and the exclusions (no arbitrary JavaScript, no file upload, no origin switch, no implicit submit) effectively route the agent to browser_evaluate, browser_upload and browser_navigate_url. Alternatives are described by capability rather than by name, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All ReMCP 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?