Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
neko-browser

neko-browser

by aliksir
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

neko_press_key

Press a keyboard key in the browser for automation tasks, supporting Enter, Tab, Escape, arrow keys, and other Playwright key names.

Instructions

Press a keyboard key (Enter, Tab, Escape, Backspace, ArrowDown, etc.). Uses Playwright key names.

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": {
      "key": "<key>"
    },
    "name": "neko_press_key"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYesKey to press (e.g. Enter, Tab, Escape, Backspace, Delete, ArrowUp, ArrowDown, ArrowLeft, ArrowRight, Home, End, F1-F12, Control+a, Shift+Tab)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'Uses Playwright key names' but doesn't disclose behaviors like whether it waits for the action, affects focus, or has side effects. For a simple action tool, more clarity would be beneficial.

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 sentence with 15 words, front-loaded with the action and examples. Every word is necessary. No redundant or filler content.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the basics but could specify context (e.g., requires a focused tab, works in browser). It doesn't mention whether it works on dialogs or if it can use special keys like modifiers.

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 coverage is 100% with a detailed key description including examples. The description adds 'Uses Playwright key names' which provides extra context beyond the schema, justifying a baseline 3. No major gaps.

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?

The description clearly states the action 'Press a keyboard key' with explicit examples (Enter, Tab, Escape, etc.) and distinguishes from siblings like neko_type (typing) and neko_click (clicking). The verb 'Press' and resource 'keyboard key' are specific.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like neko_type or neko_fill. The description implies it's for individual key presses, but doesn't exclude scenarios like text input or combinations. No when-not or prerequisites mentioned.

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