Skip to main content
Glama
seleniumbase

SeleniumBase MCP

Official
by seleniumbase
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

Check Condition

check_if_condition
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check if an element or text is currently present or visible, returning True or False without waiting for page changes.

Instructions

Check the current state of an element or text without waiting for the condition to become true.

Use this tool when you need an immediate boolean observation of the current page state. Use wait_for_condition when the condition may become true later and the workflow should wait for it. Use assert_condition when the condition is an expected requirement and failure should be treated as an assertion error.

Args: check: The element state to inspect when text is not provided: - "present": Return True when at least one matching element exists. - "visible": Return True when the matching element is visible. check is ignored when text is provided.

selector:
    CSS selector or SeleniumBase selector identifying the element.

text:
    Optional text to check for visibility within `selector`. When
    provided, this takes precedence over `check`; the tool checks text
    visibility instead of element presence or visibility. Use this when
    the question is "Is this text currently visible?" rather than
    whether the element itself is present or visible.

Returns: True or False indicating whether the requested condition is currently satisfied. Missing elements return False rather than raising an exception. If there's an error, returns a string with error details.

Tool selection: - Immediate boolean observation -> use check_if_condition. - Wait for a state/content transition -> use wait_for_condition. - Verify an expected condition -> use assert_condition. - Need element details of matching elements -> use find_elements. - Need to read page or element content -> use get_content.

Notes: This tool does not intentionally wait for elements or text to appear. It is intended for checking the current state only. If page timing or asynchronous loading matters, use wait_for_condition instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textNo
checkNovisible
selectorNobody

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv4.54.4

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral detail beyond these annotations: it explicitly states the tool does not wait, missing elements return False instead of raising an exception, and errors return a string with details. This gives the agent a realistic model of the tool's runtime behavior.

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 well-structured with clear sections: purpose, usage guidance, arguments, returns, and tool selection. The key non-waiting behavior is front-loaded, and the tool selection section is compact and actionable. Each section earns its place without unnecessary repetition.

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

Completeness5/5

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

The description is complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. It covers purpose, parameter semantics, return behavior, error handling, non-waiting behavior, and explicit routing to sibling tools. Given the annotations and output schema, nothing essential is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the burden of explaining parameters, and it does. It defines the 'check' enum values ('present' and 'visible'), clarifies that 'check' is ignored when 'text' is provided, explains 'selector' as a CSS/SeleniumBase selector, and describes 'text' as an optional visibility check that takes precedence. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Check the current state of an element or text without waiting for the condition to become true.' It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings by naming wait_for_condition and assert_condition and describing the difference in behavior. The purpose is unmistakable even before reading the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives: 'Immediate boolean observation -> use check_if_condition', 'Wait for a state/content transition -> use wait_for_condition', 'Verify an expected condition -> use assert_condition'. It also lists other sibling tools such as find_elements and get_content for different needs, giving an agent clear routing rules.

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