type_text

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the input is cleared first (destructive), that pressing Enter is optional, and that the tool returns a snapshot. This is adequate transparency for a simple typing tool.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. The action is front-loaded, and all key behaviors are stated concisely.

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 the presence of an output schema, the description covers the core functionality (typing, clearing, submitting, returning snapshot). Minor gaps like error handling for invalid index are not critical.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'text' and 'enter' implicitly, and 'index' as 'given index', but does not detail the meaning or constraints of each parameter (e.g., index range, text format). Some value added but not complete.

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 'Type' and resource 'input with the given index', clearly distinguishing it from siblings like 'click' and 'read'. It also explains the clearing behavior and optional submission.

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 some usage context (clears first, optional enter) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'click' or 'borrow', nor does it give exclusions or prerequisites.

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