Skip to main content
Glama

fill

Enter text into web form fields using CSS selectors to automate data input during browser testing on ARM64 devices.

Instructions

Fill an input field

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
selectorYesCSS selector for the input field
valueYesValue to fill

Implementation Reference

  • The core handler function for the 'fill' MCP tool. Ensures the Chromium browser is running, clicks on the target selector to focus the input field, then inserts the provided value using the Chrome DevTools Protocol (CDP) Input.insertText command.
    async fill(selector, value) {
      await this.ensureChromium();
      await this.click(selector); // Focus element first
      
      // Clear and type
      await this.sendCDPCommand('Input.insertText', { text: value });
      
      return {
        content: [{ type: 'text', text: `Filled ${selector} with: ${value}` }],
      };
    }
  • The input schema definition for the 'fill' tool as registered in the ListTools response, specifying the required 'selector' (CSS selector) and 'value' (string to fill) parameters.
    {
      name: 'fill',
      description: 'Fill an input field',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          selector: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'CSS selector for the input field',
          },
          value: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'Value to fill',
          },
        },
        required: ['selector', 'value'],
      },
    },
  • index.js:357-358 (registration)
    The dispatch registration in the CallToolRequestSchema handler switch statement that routes 'fill' tool calls to the fill handler method.
    case 'fill':
      return await this.fill(args.selector, args.value);
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. 'Fill an input field' implies a mutation (changing input value), but it doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it triggers events, requires the field to be interactable, handles errors if the selector is invalid, or has side effects. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 'Fill an input field' is extremely concise with zero waste—it's a single, front-loaded sentence that directly states the action. Every word earns its place, making it efficient for quick understanding.

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 the tool's complexity (a mutation operation with 2 parameters), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain return values, error handling, or interaction details, leaving gaps that could hinder an AI agent's ability to use it correctly in a web automation context.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters ('selector' and 'value') with clear descriptions. The description adds no meaning beyond this, such as examples of CSS selectors or validation rules for the value. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Fill an input field' states a clear verb ('fill') and resource ('input field'), but it's vague about scope and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'select' or 'get_selected_element' which might also interact with input fields. It provides basic purpose but lacks specificity about what type of input fields or context.

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?

The description offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'select' (which might select options) or 'get_selected_element' (which might retrieve input values), there's no indication of when 'fill' is appropriate, such as for text inputs versus other form elements, or prerequisites like needing an element to be visible.

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/nfodor/claude-arm64-browser'

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