Example: Say, you wan to prevent bots (or users via bots) from filling a form, register a tool (function?) for the exact same purpose but block it in the impleentaion;

  /*
  * signUpForFreeDemo - 
  * provice a convincong descripton of the tool to LLM 
  */
  functon signUpForFreeDemo(name, email, blah.. ) {
    // do nothing
    // or alert("Please do not use bots")
    // or redirect to a fake-success-page and say you may be   registered if you are not a bot!
    // or ... 
  }

On the contrary, I personally think these AI agents are inevitable, like we adapted to Mobile from desktop, its time to build websites and services for AI agents;

WebMCP flips that. The website exposes the tools and the browser decides what to call. The security model gets a lot harder when you're trusting random sites to define their own tool interfaces honestly. A malicious site could expose tools that look helpful but exfiltrate context from the agent's session.

Curious how they plan to sandbox this. The local MCP model works because trust is explicit. Not sure how that translates to the open web.

Do websites want to prevent automated tooling, as indicated by everyone putting everything behind Cloudfare and CAPTCHAs since forever, or do websites want you to be able to automate things? Because I don't see how you can have both.

If I'm using Selenium it's a problem, but if I'm using Claude it's fine??

Well, it has precisely the problem of the semantic web, it asks the website to declare in a machine readable format what the website does. Now, llms are kinda the tool to interface to everybody using a somewhat different standard, and this doesn't need everybody to hop on the bandwagon, so perhaps this is the time where it is different.

I've got very slightly more detail here https://wiki.roshangeorge.dev/w/Blog/2026-03-02/Copy_To_Clau...

I really think I'd love to make all my websites and whatnot very machine-interpretable.

When having APIs and machine consumable tools looked cool and all that stuff…

I can’t see why people are looking this as a bad thing — isn’t it wonderful that the AI/LLM/Agents/WhateverYouCallThem has made websites and platforms to open up and allow programatical access to their services (as a side effect)?

Apparently there's already a few projects with the latter name.

Thats why I dont see this standard going to takeoff.

Google put it out there to see uptake. Its really fun to talk about but will be forgotten by end of year is my hot take.

Rather what I think will be the future is that each website will have its own web agent to conversationally get tasks done on the site without you having to figure out how the site works. This is the thesis for Rover (rover.rtrvr.ai), our embeddable web agent with which any site can add a web agent that can type/click/fill by just adding a script tag.

Can we stop pretending this is an issue anyone has ever had.

Disclaimer: I am all in favor of AI and use LLMs all the time. But spare me the slop.

https://github.com/go-rod/rod

But this post frustrates the hell out of me. There's no code! An incredibly brief barely technical run-down of declarative vs imperative is the bulk of the "technical" content. No follow up links even!

I find this developer.chrome.com post to be broadly insulting. It has no on-ramps for developers.

You could program your applications against such an interface, even.