Airbrowser

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

find_elements

Get a structured list of all elements matching a CSS or XPath selector, including count, tag name, text, and optional outer HTML for inspection.

Instructions

Find matching elements and return structured element information.

Use this tool when you need to discover how many elements match a selector, inspect their text/tag names, or inspect the HTML of multiple matches.

This tool converts matching elements into ordinary serializable dictionaries. It does not return live SeleniumBase element objects.

Args: selector: A CSS selector, or an XPath selector that SeleniumBase can convert to CSS. In sb.find_elements, SeleniumBase automatically attempts to convert XPath to CSS. Some XPath expressions, such as those using contains(...), cannot be converted to CSS and therefore aren't supported by this tool.

timeout: Maximum number of seconds to wait for at least one matching
    element to appear. If the selector is an XPath selector that
    cannot be converted into a valid CSS selector, then the wait
    might be less than the timeout.

include_html: If True, include each matching element's outer HTML.
    If False, return only tag name and text.

Returns: A dictionary containing: - count: Number of matching elements found. - matches: A list of element dictionaries containing tag_name and text, plus html when include_html=True. If there's an error during search, then "error" is added into the returned dictionary with error details.

Tool selection: - Need structured information about matching elements -> use find_elements. - Need the visible text/HTML of a page or a single element -> use get_content. - Need to click one of several matches -> use click_element with nth. - Need to know whether an element is present/visible -> use check_if_condition.

Notes: Element handles cannot be persisted across MCP calls. If you find elements and then need to act on one, resolve it again with the appropriate interaction tool.

For uncaught errors, @handle_sb_errors returns strings.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`timeout`	No
`selector`	Yes
`include_html`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.15.0Sep 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and delivers: it warns that results are serializable dictionaries rather than live element objects, that handles cannot persist across MCP calls, that XPath 'contains(...)' selectors are unsupported and that timeout may be shortened for unconvertible XPath, and that errors are surfaced in the returned dict. These are non-obvious operational constraints an agent would otherwise learn only by failing.

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 structure is well front-loaded—purpose, then usage, then Args/Returns/Tool selection/Notes—so an agent can skim. It runs slightly long, with some overlap between the opening paragraph and the Args section, and the closing '@handle_sb_errors returns strings' note is internal-sounding boilerplate, but almost every line earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 3-parameter tool with 0% schema coverage and no annotations, the description covers input semantics, return shape, error behavior, and the cross-call persistence limitation, so it is complete even though an output schema exists. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate and it does: selector (CSS or convertible XPath, with the conversion limitation called out), timeout (max wait for first match, plus the shortening caveat), and include_html (outer HTML vs. tag/text only) are each explained beyond their names and defaults. No parameter is left to guesswork.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource ('Find matching elements and return structured element information') and the Tool selection block explicitly differentiates it from get_content, click_element, and check_if_condition. An agent can identify the tool's niche without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It states concrete triggers ('discover how many elements match a selector, inspect their text/tag names, or inspect the HTML of multiple matches') and routes to named alternatives with their own conditions. When-to-use vs. when-to-use-something-else is fully covered.

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