type_text

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

The description discloses focusing, entering text, optional clearing and pressing Enter. Annotations indicate non-destructive (destructiveHint: false), and the description adds behavioral details beyond that, though it does not cover all edge cases.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and provides specific guidance in the second sentence without any wasted words.

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?

With 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers main functionality but leaves gaps (e.g., target format, text encoding, behavior when element not found). It is adequate but lacks completeness.

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?

Schema coverage is low (17%), but the description adds context for frameId and implicitly for text, clear, and submit. However, it does not explain the target format or returnSnapshot behavior beyond the schema.

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 tool focuses an element and enters text, with optional clearing and pressing Enter. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like click, hover, and press_key.

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 usage guidance for frameId with selectors inside a frame, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use.

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