Skip to main content
Glama

browser_type

Enter text into web page elements during automated browser sessions to simulate user input and interaction.

Instructions

Type text

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
elementYes
refYes
textYes
submitNo

Implementation Reference

  • Registration and handler for the 'browser_type' tool, which validates input using Zod and proxies the call via 'proxyToolCall'.
    server.tool('browser_type', 'Type text', {
      element: z.string(),
      ref: z.string(),
      text: z.string(),
      submit: z.boolean().optional()
    }, async (args) => {
      const check = requireActivePage();
      if (check) return check;
      return proxyToolCall('browser_type', args);
    });
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, yet the description discloses nothing about behavior. It doesn't state whether this clears existing text, triggers input events, simulates human typing speed, or whether the optional 'submit' parameter triggers form submission.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is only two words, but this represents under-specification rather than effective conciseness. For a 4-parameter tool with zero schema documentation, this length is inappropriately brief and front-loaded with nothing.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Completely inadequate for the complexity level. With 4 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the tool requires detailed description coverage, yet provides only a generic two-word phrase.

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

Parameters2/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate for the undocumented parameters. While 'Type text' loosely hints at the 'text' parameter's purpose, it provides no insight into 'element'/'ref' (likely selector mechanisms) or 'submit' functionality.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Type text' is tautological and extremely vague. It doesn't specify the resource being acted upon (web form elements), the context (browser automation), or how it differs from siblings like browser_press_key or browser_select_option.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

Zero guidance provided. The description doesn't indicate when to use this versus alternatives like browser_press_key or browser_select_option, nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., requiring a focused element).

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/OMGEverdo/browser-pool-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server