Select one or more options from a dropdown menu to automate web form filling and browser interactions.
Select one or more options in a dropdown.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| target | Yes | Element ref like e3 from a prior browser_snapshot, OR a raw Playwright selector (css=, xpath=, text=, role=). | |
| values | Yes | ||
| element | No | Human-readable element description for logging only. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not say whether selection dispatches change events, how it waits for the element, or what happens if a value is not found in the dropdown.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no waste. Brevity here reflects under-specification rather than tight editing, but structurally it is sound.
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?
For a 3-parameter mutation-style tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description omits matching semantics for values, failure behavior, and event/wait characteristics an agent needs to call it correctly.
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?
Schema coverage is 67%: target and element are documented, but the values array is not. The description adds only the hint that multiple options can be selected, without clarifying whether values match option value, label, or index. Baseline 3 for moderate coverage.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Select ... in a <select> dropdown'), which is unambiguous. It doesn't distinguish itself from near siblings like browser_click or browser_fill_form, but the dropdown-specific framing is clear enough.
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 on when to use this instead of browser_click, browser_type, or browser_fill_form, and no prerequisites (e.g., that the select must already be visible). Usage is only inferable from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.