browser_type

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says that text is typed; it does not mention whether existing text is replaced, whether it executes after a delay, or what happens with special characters. There is also no mention of return values or side effects.

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 a single, compact sentence that front-loads the action and target. It contains no redundant or vague wording, making it highly efficient.

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 with one parameter and no output schema, so the core behavior is covered. However, it lacks guidance on focus prerequisites, the distinction from browser_fill, and handling of special keys. This makes it minimally complete but not fully self-sufficient given the large sibling context.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description must compensate. The phrase 'Type text' clarifies that the 'text' parameter is the string to be typed, which is helpful. However, it adds no details about accepted formats (e.g., newlines, key names) beyond the schema's generic string type.

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 states a clear verb ('Type'), a resource ('text'), and a specific target ('currently focused element'). This differentiates it from sibling tools like browser_fill (which fills form fields) and browser_press_key (which sends key combinations). The purpose is unambiguous.

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 implies the tool is used after focusing an element, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like browser_fill or browser_press_key. No when-not conditions or alternative tool references are provided, leaving some ambiguity for the agent.

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