Skip to main content
Glama
andresolbach

nodriver-mcp-server

by andresolbach
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Fill form

fill_form

Fill multiple form fields in a single call, processing them in order and reporting per-field success or error even if one fails.

Instructions

Fill several form fields in a single call.

Behaves like fill per field, but costs one round trip instead of one per field. Fields are processed in the order given, which matters on pages that reveal or enable later fields in response to earlier ones.

A field that fails does not abort the rest: the response reports success or the specific error per uid, so a partially filled form is always visible rather than silent.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
browserNoWhich browser to act on. Each name is an independent Chrome, created on first use. Omit for the shared default; parallel agents each need their own name.default
elementsYesThe fields to fill, in order — each entry is {"uid": "...", "value": "..."}.
include_snapshotNoAppend a fresh page snapshot to the response. Worth it when this action changes the page and take_snapshot would be your next call anyway — it saves a round trip, at the cost of a much larger response.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.5.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / browser
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "default",
+  "description": "Which browser to act on. Each name is an independent Chrome, created on first use. Omit for the shared default; parallel agents each need their own name.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv1.7.2

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description reveals important behavioral details not captured by annotations: fields are processed in order, later fields may depend on earlier ones, a failing field does not abort the remaining fill, and the response reports per-uid success/error. This goes well beyond the annotation hints and gives the agent accurate expectations about partial failures and ordering side effects.

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?

The description is tightly structured: a one-sentence summary, a comparison with the sibling `fill`, and a note about ordering and failure handling. Every sentence contributes distinctive behavioral or usage information, and there is no redundant repetition of schema or annotation content.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Combined with the fully described input schema and annotations, the description covers what the tool does, how it differs from `fill`, ordering semantics, failure behavior, and partial-fill visibility. An output schema exists, so return values do not need to be re-explained, and nothing critical for correct invocation is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters, which earns a baseline of 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that `elements` are processed in the given order and that the result reports per-uid success or error, deepening the agent's understanding of the key parameter.

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 opens with the specific verb-resource pair 'Fill several form fields in a single call', which clearly states the action and scope. It explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling `fill` by noting it behaves like `fill` per field but costs one round trip, distinguishing the two tools without opening schemas.

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?

The description gives clear context by explaining that this tool batches multiple fields into one round trip and references `fill` as the per-field equivalent. It does not explicitly state 'use this for multiple fields and fill for a single field', but the efficiency motivation and the sibling comparison strongly imply the appropriate usage.

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