Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
omni-browser

omni-browser

by rianprei
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

browser_select

Select an option in a standard HTML select element by specifying its CSS selector and target value to automate form choices in a Chromium browser.

Instructions

Select an option in a standard HTML select.

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>",
      "value": "<value>"
    },
    "name": "browser_select"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
valueYes
selectorYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior on its own. It only says it selects an option and omits whether the selector is CSS/XPath, how value matching works, whether change events fire, or what happens on failure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. However, its brevity leaves significant semantic gaps, though this dimension is about structure rather than completeness.

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, no output schema, and zero parameter descriptions, the definition is too thin. It does not cover prerequisites, failure modes, or the exact selector/value conventions needed to call it correctly.

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

Parameters2/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage, the two parameters are undocumented beyond their names. The description adds only that an option is selected, without clarifying selector format or whether 'value' refers to the option's value attribute or visible label.

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 states a specific verb ('select') and resource ('option in a standard HTML select'), making the action clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings such as browser_click or browser_fill, but the scope is narrow enough to be understandable.

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 phrase 'standard HTML select' implies the tool is intended for native select elements, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not mention custom dropdown widgets or alternatives such as browser_click, leaving the agent to infer applicability.

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