Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
pony-browser-mcp

pony-browser-mcp

by pssrh
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

browser_list_frames

List all iframes on the current page, showing each frame's URL and index to help identify and target specific frames for automation.

Instructions

List all frames (iframes) in the current page with their URLs and indices.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "browser_list_frames"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the output content (URLs and indices) and scope (current page), but it does not mention whether nested frames are included, ordering behavior, or that the indices are meant for later frame selection.

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?

One concise sentence with no filler. The core action, resource, and output fields are immediately available.

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 zero-parameter listing tool, this is mostly complete: it says what is listed and what is returned. Minor gaps remain around nested frame handling and the relationship to browser_select_frame, but they do not seriously impair usability.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty, so there is nothing to explain. The baseline of 4 applies since no parameter semantics are needed.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('frames (iframes) in the current page'), and the returned data ('URLs and indices'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like browser_select_frame and browser_list_tabs.

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 this is a discovery step on the current page, but it does not explicitly say when to use it versus alternatives such as browser_select_frame. No exclusions or direct usage conditions are provided.

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