fx_type

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the key clearing behavior and the keep override, which is valuable. However, it does not mention actionability, waiting, focus, event triggering, or failure behavior, leaving notable gaps for a browser automation type action.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence that communicates the core action and the most important behavioral modifier. There is no wasted text, and every word earns its place.

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 has four parameters with no required markers, no annotations, and no output schema, yet the description only clarifies the keep behavior. The agent is left without understanding how to identify the target element via ref vs selector, making the definition incomplete for reliable invocation.

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 only 25%, and only 'keep' has schema documentation. The description adds no meaning for 'ref', 'text', or 'selector', leaving the agent to guess which identifier is required and how text is interpreted. It does not compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 specific verb ('Type'), a resource ('text into element'), and a clear behavioral nuance ('clears first unless keep=true'). This makes it distinct from siblings like fx_click and fx_select without needing to inspect schemas.

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 for entering text into an element, but it does not explicitly say when to prefer it over alternatives, nor does it state exclusions or conditions. The 'clears first unless keep=true' detail is the only usage-specific guidance, so it remains mostly implied.

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