fill_by_uid
Fill a text input or textarea element by its UID with a specified text value.
Instructions
Fill text input/textarea by UID.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| uid | Yes | Input element UID from snapshot | |
| value | Yes | Text to fill |
Fill a text input or textarea element by its UID with a specified text value.
Fill text input/textarea by UID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| uid | Yes | Input element UID from snapshot | |
| value | Yes | Text to fill |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states the action but fails to disclose whether it clears existing text, appends, or requires element visibility/focus. No side effects or constraints are mentioned.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, concise sentence with no superfluous words. It is front-loaded and directly states the core functionality.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple fill tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides the minimum viable information. However, it lacks behavioral details and usage guidelines, leaving gaps in completeness.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the parameter names and schema descriptions; it merely restates the action.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'fill', the resource 'text input/textarea', and the method 'by UID'. It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'fill_form_by_uid' by specifying a single element type.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'fill_form_by_uid' or 'click_by_uid', nor does it mention prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/simon-ami/zen-devtools-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server