agent-browser-mcp

by minhlucvan

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

browser_uncheck

Clears a selected checkbox in the browser by providing its CSS selector, enabling automated control over form states.

Instructions

Uncheck a checkbox

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": {
      "selector": "<selector>"
    },
    "name": "browser_uncheck"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`selector`	Yes	Selector or ref for the checkbox element
`sessionId`	No	Browser session ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.3Aug 14, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It only restates the intended outcome and offers no details about idempotency, error behavior, or requirements (e.g., element must be a checkbox). This is essentially a tautology of the tool's name.

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 one short sentence with no redundant words. It is perfectly concise for what it minimally conveys, and every word earns its place.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given no annotations, no output schema, and only a four-word description, the tool is insufficiently contextualized. The description omits behavioral details, usage alternatives, and any caveats, making it incomplete even for a simple action.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions for selector and sessionId. The description adds no extra meaning about parameter usage, so baseline 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 'Uncheck a checkbox' clearly states a specific action on a specific resource (checkbox), which distinguishes it from sibling tool browser_check. It is direct and unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as browser_check, nor any mention of preconditions (e.g., checkbox currently checked). The usage is only implied by the verb 'uncheck'.

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