Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
pinchtab-mcp

pinchtab-mcp

by maderwin
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

Hover

pinchtab_hover

Hover over a specific element using its reference ID to trigger mouseover events, revealing tooltips, dropdown menus, or hover states.

Instructions

Hover over an element by its ref ID. Triggers mouseover/mouseenter events — useful for revealing tooltips, dropdown menus, or hover states.

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": {
      "ref": "<ref>"
    },
    "name": "pinchtab_hover"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
refYesElement reference ID (e.g. 'e5')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains that the tool triggers mouseover/mouseenter events, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not disclose potential side effects or prerequisites (e.g., element must be visible).

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and uses no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what it does and when to use it. It lacks error handling or preconditions, but the context of sibling tools (like wait_for_selector) mitigates this.

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 coverage is 100% and the parameter description is clear. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond repeating 'by its ref ID.' Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the verb 'hover' and the resource 'element by its ref ID.' It also explains the triggered events and use cases, distinguishing it from sibling tools like click or focus.

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?

The description mentions usefulness for revealing tooltips, dropdowns, or hover states, providing some context. However, it does not specify when not to use this tool or offer alternatives among the many sibling tools.

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