Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
chrome-fast

chrome-fast

by ventos312
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

fill_form

Fill multiple form fields in one call—text inputs, textareas, selects, checkboxes, radios, and contenteditable elements—then optionally submit the form.

Instructions

Fill several form fields in one call: text inputs, textareas, selects (by option value or label), checkboxes and radios ("true"/"false") and contenteditable elements. Much faster than calling type repeatedly. Returns the updated page.

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": {
      "fields": "<fields>"
    },
    "name": "fill_form"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fieldsYesFields to fill, in order
submitNoAfterwards submit the form containing the last field, as if its submit button were pressed (default: false)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.3.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the return value ('Returns the updated page') and the batch semantics. However, it says nothing about what happens if a selector fails to match, whether events are dispatched to trigger framework listeners, or whether filling a field validates or clears prior content — meaningful gaps for a DOM-mutating tool.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the batch capability, then the comparative rationale. No filler. The parenthetical format notes for checkbox and select values are slightly redundant with the schema but arguably useful for quick scanning.

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?

The tool is simple (two parameters, no nested objects, no output schema required since the return is stated), and the description covers what it fills and what it returns. Failure behavior for bad selectors and the consequences of submit remain unstated, which is a modest gap rather than a blocking one.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both 'fields' and 'submit' are already documented including the checkbox/select value conventions. The description restates the value semantics but adds nothing new about the 'submit' side effect (e.g., navigation or validation) beyond what the schema says.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('fill several form fields in one call') and enumerates exactly what it covers: text inputs, textareas, selects by value or label, checkboxes/radios, and contenteditable elements. It explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling tool 'type', so an agent can distinguish the two without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives a clear selection rule: use this instead of calling 'type' repeatedly for multiple fields. It does not address edge cases such as whether to use it for a single field, or when 'click'/'evaluate' would be preferable for unconventional widgets, but the primary routing signal is present.

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