Skip to main content
Glama

annotate

Add interactive hover annotations to any web page by generating a proxy URL. Open the URL in any browser to see element labels without installing extensions.

Instructions

Open a web page with hover annotations. Returns a proxy URL that adds interactive element labels to any page. User opens this URL in any browser to see annotations on hover.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesThe target URL to annotate, e.g. "http://localhost:3847" or "localhost:3847"

Implementation Reference

  • The 'annotate' tool registration and handler implementation. It takes a target URL, constructs a proxied version of it, and returns the instructions for the user.
    mcp.tool(
      'annotate',
      'Open a web page with hover annotations. Returns a proxy URL that adds interactive element labels to any page. User opens this URL in any browser to see annotations on hover.',
      {
        url: z.string().describe('The target URL to annotate, e.g. "http://localhost:3847" or "localhost:3847"'),
      },
      async ({ url }) => {
        let target = url;
        if (!target.startsWith('http')) target = 'http://' + target;
        let parsed;
        try {
          parsed = new URL(target);
        } catch(e) {
          return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: 'Invalid URL: ' + url }], isError: true };
        }
    
        const proxyUrl = `http://localhost:${PROXY_PORT}/${parsed.host}${parsed.pathname}`;
        return {
          content: [{
            type: 'text',
            text: `Annotated URL ready:\n\n${proxyUrl}\n\nOpen this URL in any browser. Hover over any element to see its name, CSS selector, and dimensions. The annotation works in Chrome, Firefox, Safari — any browser.\n\nOnce the user has the page open, use get_elements to see what UI elements are on the page.`,
          }],
        };
      }
    );
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes the tool's behavior: opening a web page with hover annotations and returning a proxy URL. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or potential side effects (e.g., if the proxy URL expires). It adds some context but doesn't fully cover behavioral traits beyond the basic operation.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, with two sentences that efficiently convey the tool's purpose and usage. Every sentence earns its place by explaining what the tool does and how to use it, with zero waste or redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is fairly complete. It explains the tool's function and output (a proxy URL for annotations), but lacks details on error handling or the nature of the annotations. Since there's no output schema, it could benefit from more on return values, but it covers the essentials adequately.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents the 'url' parameter thoroughly. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, as it doesn't explain parameter usage or constraints further. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description doesn't compensate but doesn't need to.

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 tool's purpose with specific verbs ('Open a web page with hover annotations') and resource ('any page'), and distinguishes it from siblings by focusing on annotation display rather than element retrieval or highlighting. It explicitly mentions what the tool does: opening a page with interactive labels on hover.

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 implies usage context by stating 'User opens this URL in any browser to see annotations on hover,' suggesting it's for viewing annotations interactively. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_elements' or 'highlight_element,' nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites. The guidance is present but not comprehensive.

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

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/mcpware/ui-annotator-mcp'

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