neko-browser

by aliksir

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

neko_select

Select an option from a drop-down element by providing its value, label, or index.

Instructions

Select option(s) from a select element. Specify one of: value, label, or option_index.

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": {
      "index": "<index>"
    },
    "name": "neko_select"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`index`	Yes	Element index from neko_get_state
`label`	No	Option visible text to select
`value`	No	Option value attribute to select
`option_index`	No	Zero-based index of option to select

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Jul 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states that options are selected but does not disclose behavioral details such as whether it supports multiple selection, what happens if the element is not a select, or the effect on existing selections. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single, concise sentence that quickly conveys the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded with the action and resource. However, it could benefit from slightly more structure, e.g., noting that 'index' is required.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity of interacting with a select element (potential for multiple selections, error states), the description is too brief. It does not mention what happens if the option is not found, whether it clears previous selections, or the return value. No output schema exists to compensate.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds meaning by explaining that the parameters are alternatives for specifying an option. This goes beyond the schema's individual descriptions and clarifies the selection strategy.

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 verb 'Select' and the resource 'select element', and specifies the three alternative parameters (value, label, option_index). This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like neko_click or neko_fill.

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?

The description mentions that exactly one of value, label, or option_index should be specified, implying usage context but providing no explicit guidance on when to use each alternative or when to avoid this tool. No comparison with siblings is given.

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