paste_text

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It details the exact 6-step event sequence dispatched, including event types, clipboardData, inputType, and native value setter. This is highly transparent and exceeds expectations.

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 well-structured with a star emoji, a clear one-line summary, a block explaining usage, a numbered event sequence, and a compact parameter list. Every sentence adds value, no fluff.

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 no annotations and moderate complexity (4 parameters, no nested objects, has output schema), the description covers purpose, usage, event sequence, and parameters. It lacks potential error conditions or limitations (e.g., only works on input/textarea elements), but overall it is sufficient for an agent to use correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. The Args list provides brief descriptions: 'text: value to paste', 'ref: data-mcp-ref from browser_snapshot', 'selector: CSS selector', 'submit: if True, simulate Enter keypress after paste'. While helpful, it lacks depth (e.g., no format constraints, precedence between ref and selector). Baseline is 3, and it meets minimally.

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 it sets a field value by simulating a real paste event sequence, and explicitly distinguishes itself from fill/type_text by specifying when to use it for frameworks that only listen for paste events or beforeinput with inputType:'insertFromPaste'. This provides a specific verb and resource with clear differentiation from siblings.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use when fill / type_text don't register on modern frameworks (SolidJS runes, Svelte 5 runes, some Qwik forms) that ONLY listen for paste events or beforeinput with inputType:'insertFromPaste'.' This gives clear context and alternatives, meeting the highest standard.

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