Skip to main content
Glama
Erikdai

bridge-agent

by Erikdai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

type_text

Enter text into a referenced field, or send keystrokes to the focused window when no field is given; focus checks stop input reaching the wrong window.

Instructions

Enter text into a field by ref, or send keystrokes to the focused window when no ref is given.

Keystrokes are only sent if the window observed last is still in front; if focus was stolen in between, the call
fails with an explanation instead of typing into the wrong window. Never use this for passwords: use
fill_credential, which keeps the secret out of the conversation. Returns a RESULT line and a fresh observation.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
refNoRef of the text field to fill (it is cleared first). Leave empty to send the keystrokes to whatever currently has keyboard focus, which is right for calculators, address bars and dialogs that already have focus.
textYesThe exact text to enter, e.g. 'report-2026.csv' or a whole calculator expression such as '1234+5678='.
submitNoPress Enter after typing, e.g. to submit a search box or confirm a file name.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the focus-guard failure mode (call fails rather than typing into the wrong window), the credential safety constraint, and the return shape (RESULT line plus fresh observation). It stops short of stating whether the field is cleared on failure or what happens on partial input, but the safety-critical behavior is covered.

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 core action and its two modes, and the safety warning is placed before the return-value note. The first sentence largely restates what the schema parameters already say, which is the only redundancy; the middle sentences each earn their place.

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 three-parameter interaction tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, mode selection, failure semantics and the security exclusion. Since a return schema exists, it need not detail the observation contents, and nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all three parameters (ref, text, submit) are already documented with examples. The description's mention of ref-vs-no-ref behavior duplicates the schema rather than adding syntax, edge-case or precedence detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Enter text into a field by ref, or send keystrokes to the focused window') and immediately distinguishes the two operating modes. It also names the sibling it must not be confused with (fill_credential), so an agent can route correctly without opening a schema.

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?

Explicit when-to-use for both modes: ref when targeting a specific field, no ref for calculators, address bars and dialogs that already hold focus. It adds an explicit when-not ('Never use this for passwords') plus the alternative tool to use instead.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools