iyke_type

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

The description clarifies that the tool writes (types) text and describes the default append behavior and replace option. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not mention error handling or what happens if the element is not found, but the behavior is reasonably transparent.

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 sentences with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the core purpose and provides key details succinctly.

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 tool's simplicity and lack of output schema, the description covers most essential aspects: target element, how to specify it, text input, and append/replace behavior. It misses an explanation of the pane parameter and does not describe return values, but overall is fairly complete.

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 schema has 0% coverage, so the description must add meaning. It explains that ref and selector are mutually exclusive, that replace defaults to false, and the text parameter. However, the pane parameter is not explained, and ref/selector are not described beyond being identifiers.

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 action (type text) and the target resources (input/textarea/contenteditable elements). It specifies the targeting mechanism using ref or selector, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like iyke_click or iyke_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 explains the default behavior (append) and how to override it (replace=true). It also states the constraint to specify exactly one of ref or selector. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or provide alternative tools.

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