safari_type_text

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

Discloses the character-by-character nature and realistic key events, plus ref expiration. Without annotations, it covers key behavioral traits, though side effects like auto-focusing are implied but not explicit.

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?

Four concise sentences, each adding value: purpose, best-for, alternatives, and a usage warning. No redundancy or 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 the tool's complexity (3 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description fully covers when to use, how it behaves, and key dependencies (ref from snapshot). No gaps.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds context on typing style but does not elaborate on parameter semantics beyond schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 types text character-by-character with realistic key events, and explicitly distinguishes it from siblings (safari_fill for rich editors, safari_replace_editor for code editors).

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?

Provides explicit best-for scenarios (search boxes, chat inputs, keystroke-reactive fields) and when-not-to-use with concrete alternative tools. Also includes a critical tip about ref expiration.

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