type_text

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses a key behavior by stating 'Returns a new snapshot,' and the action of typing is clear. However, it does not mention whether text replaces existing content or appends, nor any prerequisite like focusing the element, which could be critical.

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 concise and well-structured: a single purpose line followed by a clean Args list. Every sentence adds value and the front-loaded purpose immediately tells the agent what the tool does.

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?

The tool is simple and the description covers input, action, and return. It even references the snapshot tool by mentioning 'index from snapshot.' The presence of an output schema reduces the need to detail return values. Minor gaps like error behavior or text replacement semantics keep it from a perfect score.

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 provides an Args section that explains all three parameters: index (element index from snapshot), text (text to type), and session_id (session to act on, default default). This fully compensates for the schema's 0% property descriptions, adding missing meaning.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Type text into the element with the given index.' This clearly differentiates the tool from siblings like 'click' or 'press_key' by indicating the action (typing) and the target (element index).

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 usage context is implied: the tool is for typing text into a specific element. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives like 'press_key' or 'click', nor exclusions such as whether the element must be focused.

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