Skip to main content
Glama

pilot_file_upload

Upload files to web forms by specifying file paths and targeting file input elements using references or CSS selectors.

Instructions

Upload file(s) to a file input element.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
refYesFile input element ref or CSS selector
pathsYesFile paths to upload

Implementation Reference

  • Implementation of the pilot_file_upload tool, including schema definition and execution logic.
    server.tool(
      'pilot_file_upload',
      'Upload file(s) to a file input element.',
      {
        ref: z.string().describe('File input element ref or CSS selector'),
        paths: z.array(z.string()).describe('File paths to upload'),
      },
      async ({ ref, paths }) => {
        await bm.ensureBrowser();
        try {
          for (const fp of paths) {
            if (!fs.existsSync(fp)) throw new Error(`File not found: ${fp}`);
          }
          const page = bm.getPage();
          const resolved = await bm.resolveRef(ref);
          if ('locator' in resolved) {
            await resolved.locator.setInputFiles(paths);
          } else {
            await page.locator(resolved.selector).setInputFiles(paths);
          }
          const fileInfo = paths.map(fp => {
            const stat = fs.statSync(fp);
            return `${path.basename(fp)} (${stat.size}B)`;
          }).join(', ');
          bm.resetFailures();
          return { content: [{ type: 'text' as const, text: `Uploaded: ${fileInfo}` }] };
        } catch (err) {
          bm.incrementFailures();
          return { content: [{ type: 'text' as const, text: wrapError(err) }], isError: true };
        }
      }
    );
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but discloses minimal behavioral details. It doesn't explain what 'upload' means technically (event dispatching, file list population), whether operation is blocking, success indicators, or side effects on the page state.

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?

Single 7-word sentence with zero waste. Front-loaded with verb, immediately clear. Appropriate length for the tool's simplicity.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Minimal but adequate for a simple 2-parameter tool with complete schema documentation. No output schema exists, but description doesn't indicate success/failure behavior or return structure. Lacks behavioral context expected for browser automation (event guarantees).

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 has 100% description coverage with clear param documentation. The description mentions 'file(s)' aligning with the paths array, but adds no semantic detail beyond the schema (e.g., path format requirements, absolute vs relative paths). Baseline 3 appropriate when schema is comprehensive.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Upload') and target ('file input element'), distinguishing it from siblings like pilot_fill or pilot_click which handle other element types. The plural '(s)' accurately reflects the array parameter. It lacks explicit browser automation context, but the tool name prefix and siblings make this clear.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

Provides no guidance on when to use versus alternatives (e.g., pilot_fill), prerequisites (element visibility requirements), or error conditions (invalid selectors, missing files). The agent must infer usage context from the parameter schema alone.

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/TacosyHorchata/Pilot'

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