Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ie-mcp

ie-mcp

by thomfilg
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

ie_fill

Types text into input or textarea elements, automatically waiting for elements to load. Supports optional clearing and targeting specific frames for legacy IE web automation.

Instructions

Type text into an input/textarea element (auto-waits).

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": {
      "by": "<by>",
      "value": "<value>",
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "ie_fill"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
byYes
textYes
clearNo
frameNo
valueYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Mentions 'auto-waits' implying the tool waits for the element to be ready, which adds behavioral context beyond the bare schema. However, it fails to disclose whether the field is cleared before typing (the 'clear' parameter exists) or any default behavior.

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?

Single sentence, no fluff. Efficiently communicates core action. However, given 5 parameters, a bit more detail could be included without harming conciseness.

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?

With 5 parameters, no schema descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. The agent lacks information on return values, parameter usage, and edge cases (e.g., frames or clearing).

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 description must explain parameters. It only connects 'text' to the typing action but does not clarify 'by', 'value', 'clear', or 'frame'. The agent cannot infer how to locate the element or use optional parameters.

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 'Type text into an input/textarea element (auto-waits).' This clearly identifies the action (typing text) and target (input/textarea elements), differentiating it from siblings like ie_click or ie_text.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like ie_press_key or ie_select. The description provides no context for selection criteria.

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