check
Check a checkbox input by providing a CSS selector to identify the element.
Instructions
Check a checkbox
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| selector | Yes |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Check a checkbox input by providing a CSS selector to identify the element.
Check a checkbox
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| selector | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It only states the action without disclosing behavior such as whether it scrolls to element, waits for visibility, or fails if already checked. This leaves significant uncertainty.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Excessively terse; a single sentence that is under-specified. While concise, it sacrifices necessary detail that could be added without significant bloat.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Despite having an output schema, the description lacks crucial context such as selector format, behavior on already-checked checkboxes, and edge cases. For a tool with one parameter and no annotations, this is insufficient.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The sole parameter 'selector' has 0% schema description coverage and the description adds no meaning. The agent has no clue about selector format (CSS, XPath, etc.) or how to use it correctly.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'Check a checkbox' clearly states the action and target resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'uncheck' and 'click', but does not explicitly differentiate from 'click' which could also be used on checkboxes.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'click' or 'uncheck'. There is no mention of prerequisites or when to avoid using it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/cuber-it/mcp_playwright_tools'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server