browser_type

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions typing text, submitting, and returning a snapshot, but fails to disclose the default clearing behavior (clear=true), error handling for invalid refs, or any destructive side effects. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotations.

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 fairly concise, front-loading the main action and then adding details about submit and value alias. It avoids unnecessary words, though a small amount of redundancy exists (e.g., 'Pass the string as text' could be integrated).

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?

Given the complexity (6 parameters, no annotations), the description covers the primary purpose and two key parameters but misses the default clear behavior and session_id. Output schema exists but is not leveraged to describe return values. The description is adequate but not thorough.

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?

The description adds meaning for ref, text, value (alias), and submit, but does not explain session_id or clear. Since schema has 0% description coverage, the description partially compensates by explaining key parameters, though it leaves gaps.

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 'type text into a field' and specifies the resource is 'by ref'. It mentions the return of a snapshot, which distinguishes it from other browser actions. However, it could be more explicit about differentiating from similar tools like browser_keyboard_type or browser_set_input.

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?

The description provides minimal usage guidance. It hints at an alternative (browser_fill_form) through the value alias explanation but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus others. No conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.