Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
CDPM

CDPM

by IGELHARINE
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Fill form

browser_fill

Fill multiple input fields sequentially on a page, verifying each value and stopping on any failure. Submit via Enter or button click.

Instructions

Fills several inputs on the same page in order (each cleared, typed with real key events, value verified). Stops on page change, dialog, or any failed field, and reports how far it got. submit="Enter" presses Enter in the last field; a button ref clicks that button. For dropdowns use browser_select.

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": {
      "slot": "<slot>",
      "fields": "<fields>"
    },
    "name": "browser_fill"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tabNoTarget tab: number (1, 2…) or ID ("t7"). Use the stable ID when agents share a slot. Required for action tools when there are multiple tabs.
readNoAppend the page after the action (no separate read needed): text=body text, snapshot=snapshot page 1 (with refs), changes=only lines added/removed since your last snapshot (shortest; full page if the page changed)
slotYesBrowser slot 1-30. "3", "slot 3", "browser 3" → 3. If the user gives a port like 14052, subtract 14049.
agentNoYour display name, shown to other agents. Subagents must always set it. Default "claude-1e1b".
fieldsYesFields to fill (top to bottom)
submitNoAfter filling: "Enter" or a button ref to click
summaryNoOne-line note of what you are doing (e.g. "comparing laptop prices"). Shown in browser_status (not the status line). Omit to keep the previous one.
multiSlotNotrue only when one agent must handle several slots together (e.g. comparing). Normally omit (one agent = one slot; use subagents for the rest)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.10
    • changedInput schema / properties / agent / description
      Previous value: -"Your display name, shown to other agents. Subagents must always set it. Default \"claude-68d9\"."New value: +"Your display name, shown to other agents. Subagents must always set it. Default \"claude-1e1b\"."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
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 clearing behavior, real key events, value verification, non-atomic failure handling (stops on page change, dialog, or failed field), and that it reports partial progress. It does not describe the shape of that report, nor latency or rate considerations, but the mutation and failure semantics are unusually well covered.

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: mechanics first, failure/partial-completion behavior second, submit semantics third, with the sibling pointer last. Every clause earns its place and nothing is repeated from the schema verbatim.

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 an 8-parameter mutation tool with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description supplies the behavioral context the schema cannot: ordering, clearing, verification, and stop conditions. It could say more about what the returned progress report looks like or what state the page is left in after a mid-fill failure.

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 eight parameters are already documented, including submit ("Enter" or a button ref to click) and field ordering. The description restates those semantics and adds the clearing/verification detail for fields, but does not add format or syntax guidance beyond the schema, 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 (fills several inputs on the same page, in order) and explicitly differentiates itself from the single-value sibling browser_type and the dropdown sibling browser_select. An agent can tell what this does and what it is not for without opening the schema.

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 closing sentence 'For dropdowns use browser_select' names an alternative and the condition that selects it. The multi-field, ordered nature of the tool also implies when it is preferable to repeated browser_type calls, but that comparison is left to inference rather than stated.

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