Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
jane-app-mcp

jane-app-mcp

by cotlet-connect
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

jane_app_type

Types text into a specified numbered field on the current Jane App page, using the field number from the last read to fill forms.

Instructions

Type text into a numbered field on the current Jane App page.

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": {
      "element": "<element>",
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "jane_app_type"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYesText to type.
elementYesField number from the last read.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and largely fails to do so. It does not say whether typing replaces or appends to existing field content, whether the field is focused first, whether the value is submitted or committed, or what happens if the element number is stale.

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?

A single short sentence with zero padding that front-loads the action and target. Nothing is redundant or buried.

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?

For an unannotated UI-mutation tool, the definition omits important details: what happens to pre-existing text, whether the action commits/submits, and how failures or stale element numbers behave. The schema covers parameters, but the behavioral contract remains largely unexplained.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both 'text' and 'element'. The description reinforces that the element is a numbered field on the current page, but adds no format, ordering, or constraint detail beyond what the schema states.

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 states a specific verb+resource: typing text into a numbered field on the current Jane App page. The word 'type' clearly separates it from siblings like jane_app_click and jane_app_read, though it doesn't explicitly name an alternative.

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?

Usage is implied through the phrase 'numbered field' and the schema's 'Field number from the last read', which hints that jane_app_read must run first. However, there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no prerequisites called out in the description, and no mention of what to do instead if the field cannot be typed into.

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