Skip to main content
Glama
cploujoux

Puppeteer MCP Server

by cploujoux

puppeteer_fill

Automate input field filling on web pages using a CSS selector and specified value. Part of the Puppeteer MCP Server for browser automation tasks.

Instructions

Fill out an input field

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
selectorYesCSS selector for input field
valueYesValue to fill

Implementation Reference

  • The switch case implementing the puppeteer_fill tool. It waits for the selector, types the value into the input field using Puppeteer's page.type method, and returns success or error content.
    case "puppeteer_fill":
      try {
        await page.waitForSelector(args.selector);
        await page.type(args.selector, args.value);
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: `Filled ${args.selector} with: ${args.value}`,
            },
          ],
          isError: false,
        };
      } catch (error) {
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: `Failed to fill ${args.selector}: ${
                (error as Error).message
              }`,
            },
          ],
          isError: true,
        };
      }
  • Tool registration in the TOOLS array, defining the name, description, and input schema (selector and value required) for puppeteer_fill.
    {
      name: "puppeteer_fill",
      description: "Fill out an input field",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          selector: {
            type: "string",
            description: "CSS selector for input field",
          },
          value: { type: "string", description: "Value to fill" },
        },
        required: ["selector", "value"],
      },
    },
  • index.ts:459-461 (registration)
    Registration of all tools including puppeteer_fill via the ListToolsRequestSchema handler returning the TOOLS array.
    server.setRequestHandler(ListToolsRequestSchema, async () => ({
      tools: TOOLS,
    }));
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('fill out') but lacks details on side effects (e.g., whether it triggers events, requires the element to be visible, or handles errors), permissions, or performance considerations. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 extremely concise at four words, with no wasted language. It front-loads the core action ('Fill out') and target ('an input field'), making it easy to parse quickly. Every word earns its place, though this brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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 a Puppeteer-based interaction tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the web automation context, potential errors, or what happens after filling (e.g., if it waits for page updates). For a mutation tool in this environment, more detail is needed to guide effective use.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with clear documentation for both parameters ('selector' and 'value'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as examples or constraints. According to the rules, with high schema coverage (>80%), the baseline is 3 even without param info in the description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Fill out an input field' clearly states the action (fill) and target (input field), making the basic purpose understandable. However, it lacks specificity about the context (e.g., web page interaction via Puppeteer) and doesn't distinguish it from sibling tools like 'puppeteer_click' or 'puppeteer_select', which also interact with page elements. This results in a vague but functional purpose statement.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a page loaded via 'puppeteer_navigate'), exclusions, or comparisons to siblings like 'puppeteer_select' for dropdowns. Without such context, the agent must infer usage from the tool name and schema alone.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/cploujoux/mcp-puppeteer'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server