Skip to main content
Glama
Novpix

browsermcp-plus

by Novpix
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

browser_file_upload

Destructive

Upload local files to a web page by targeting a file input or chooser button; no file dialog appears.

Instructions

Upload local files through a file input. ref may be the file input itself or the button that opens the file chooser; no dialog is shown.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
refYesExact target element reference from the page snapshot
pathsYesAbsolute paths of the files to upload (`~` is expanded)
elementYesHuman-readable element description used to obtain permission to interact with the element
snapshotNoAlso return the page snapshot after the action (default: no). Use it when you need to see the result right away.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.4.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / snapshot
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Also return the page snapshot after the action (default: no). Use it when you need to see the result right away.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, destructive=true, and openWorld=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuine behavioral fact, 'no dialog is shown,' explaining that the native chooser is bypassed. It does not elaborate on the destructive nature or permission requirements, so it is adequate but not rich.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then the targeting nuance. No filler; every clause carries information.

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?

Covers the action, element targeting flexibility, and dialog behavior, with annotations handling the safety profile and the schema documenting parameters including the optional snapshot flag. Without an output schema the description could note the return behavior, but overall it is sufficient to invoke correctly.

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 four parameters are already documented. The description adds modest extra meaning for `ref` (file input OR triggering button), but says nothing about `paths` handling beyond what the schema states. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specific verb (upload) and resource (local files) plus the mechanism (through a file input), so an agent immediately knows what the tool does. No sibling tool performs uploads, so differentiation is implicit rather than stated, keeping it 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 Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives actionable targeting guidance: `ref` may be the file input itself or the button that opens the chooser. This resolves a common ambiguity for the caller. It stops short of naming exclusions or contrasting with browser_type/browser_fill_form, but no real alternative exists.

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