Skip to main content
Glama
brunoboto96

SceneScout

by brunoboto96
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

scout_click

Clicks an element by its snapshot ref and reports the outcome plus any oracle violations. Use repeated clicks to probe whether important submit controls guard against duplicate requests.

Instructions

Click an element by its ref from the latest scout_snapshot. Returns the outcome plus any oracle violations triggered. clicks=2 (or 3) probes IMPATIENT-USER behaviour: a rapid multi-click that fires the same state-changing request twice means the control is not guarded against double submission (button stays enabled, endpoint not idempotent) — use it on every important submit/create button once; the result says explicitly whether duplicates fired.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
refYesElement ref, e.g. e12
taskNoWhat you are DOING right now, in a few words: the action, not the acceptance criteria. "Filtering the documents register by status", "Filling the deviation form with invalid dates", "Signing in as QA_Team" — NOT "§2.4 filtering narrows the set and the filter is reflected in the URL", which is what you are CHECKING, not what you are doing. Naming the item you are on is fine ("§2.4: filtering the documents register"); keep the rest to what a colleague would see over your shoulder. It stays set until you pass a different one, so a batch costs a few words, not one per call. Required on the tools that act unless a journey or an earlier call already set one.
leaveNoHow to answer if the page asks to confirm leaving (a beforeunload prompt over unsent input): true leaves and discards that input, false stays. Omitted, observe and read-only stay and other modes leave. The result says when the page asked.
clicksNo1 = normal; 2-3 = rapid repeated clicks (double-submit probe)
sessionNoTarget this session directly instead of the active one — pass it explicitly when dispatching to MULTIPLE sessions in one turn (e.g. two scout_click calls with different `session`), which then run CONCURRENTLY rather than queueing. Omit for single-session sequential use.
objectiveNoOld name for `task` (2.0). Prefer `task`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv3.31.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv3.17.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / leave
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "How to answer if the page asks to confirm leaving (a beforeunload prompt over unsent input): true leaves and discards that input, false stays. Omitted, observe and read-only stay and other modes leave. The result says when the page asked.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  3. Changed2 schema fields changedv3.4.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / objective
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Old name for `task` (2.0). Prefer `task`.",
+  "maxLength": 120,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / task
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "What you are DOING right now, in a few words: the action, not the acceptance criteria. \"Filtering the documents register by status\", \"Filling the deviation form with invalid dates\", \"Signing in as QA_Team\" — NOT \"§2.4 filtering narrows the set and the filter is reflected in the URL\", which is what you are CHECKING, not what you are doing. Naming the item you are on is fine (\"§2.4: filtering the documents register\"); keep the rest to what a colleague would see over your shoulder. It stays set until you pass a different one, so a batch costs a few words, not one per call. Required on the tools that act unless a journey or an earlier call already set one.",
+  "maxLength": 120,
+  "type": "string"
+}
  4. Addedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the tool returns the outcome plus oracle violations and that the result says whether duplicate submissions fired, but it does not state broader safety details such as whether clicks can navigate away, require auth, or cause irreversible state changes.

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 front-loaded with the core action and return behavior, then explains the multi-click probe. The second sentence is dense but purposeful, and there is little wasted text.

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 parameter-rich interaction tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, click semantics, and return highlights. However, it leaves out important behavioral context around side effects, navigation, and destructive risk, which is a noticeable gap for a click tool.

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 six parameters. The description still adds meaningful semantics for clicks by explaining the IMPATIENT-USER double-submit probe and what a positive result means, and it clarifies that ref comes from the latest scout_snapshot.

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 states a specific action and resource: clicking an element by its ref from the latest scout_snapshot. It also distinguishes the tool's outcome focus by noting it returns the result plus oracle violations, which helps an agent understand this is an interaction-and-check tool rather than a generic browser action.

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?

It gives clear usage context for the multi-click probe, including when to use clicks=2 or 3 and that it should be used once on important submit/create buttons. It does not explicitly compare against siblings such as scout_press or scout_select, but the core when-to-use guidance is present.

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