Skip to main content
Glama
pipethedev
by pipethedev

browsercat_click

Click elements on web pages using CSS selectors to automate interactions during browser automation sessions.

Instructions

Click an element on the page

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
selectorYesCSS selector for element to click

Implementation Reference

  • Handler implementation for the browsercat_click tool. It uses Puppeteer's page.click() to click the element matching the provided CSS selector, with error handling.
    case "browsercat_click":
      try {
        await page.click(args.selector);
        return {
          content: [{
            type: "text",
            text: `Clicked: ${args.selector}`,
          }],
          isError: false,
        };
      } catch (error) {
        return {
          content: [{
            type: "text",
            text: `Failed to click ${args.selector}: ${(error as Error).message}`,
          }],
          isError: true,
        };
      }
  • Schema definition for the browsercat_click tool, specifying the required 'selector' input parameter.
    {
      name: "browsercat_click",
      description: "Click an element on the page",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          selector: { type: "string", description: "CSS selector for element to click" },
        },
        required: ["selector"],
      },
    },
  • index.ts:421-423 (registration)
    Tool registration via ListToolsRequestSchema handler, which returns the TOOLS array containing browsercat_click.
    server.setRequestHandler(ListToolsRequestSchema, async () => ({
      tools: TOOLS,
    }));
  • index.ts:425-427 (registration)
    CallToolRequestSchema handler registration, which dispatches tool calls to handleToolCall where browsercat_click case is implemented.
    server.setRequestHandler(CallToolRequestSchema, async (request) =>
      handleToolCall(request.params.name, request.params.arguments ?? {})
    );
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'click' implies an interactive action, the description doesn't mention what happens after clicking (page navigation, form submission, JavaScript execution), error conditions (what if selector doesn't exist), or performance characteristics. This leaves significant behavioral questions unanswered.

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 maximally concise with a single, clear sentence that communicates the core functionality without any wasted words. It's front-loaded with the essential information and earns its place efficiently.

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?

For a browser interaction tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't address what constitutes successful execution, what errors might occur, or what the tool returns. Given the complexity of browser automation and the lack of structured metadata, more contextual information would be valuable.

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% with the selector parameter fully documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any additional parameter semantics beyond what's already in the schema's description field. This meets the baseline expectation when schema coverage is complete.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description 'Click an element on the page' clearly states the action (click) and target (element on page), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like 'browsercat_hover' which performs a similar targeting action but with different interaction type.

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 provides no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of prerequisites (like requiring a page to be loaded first), comparison with similar tools (like hover vs click), or typical use cases for clicking versus other interactions available in the sibling toolset.

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/pipethedev/browsercat-mcp-server'

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