type

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose key behaviors: whether it clears existing text, supports special characters, or requires a focused field. The short description fails to convey important behavioral traits.

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 extremely concise (5 words) with no fluff. However, given 23 parameters, it could be restructured to separate device-targeting from typing-specific parameters while remaining brief. It earns points for being front-loaded and to the point.

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 23 parameters but no output schema. The description does not explain return values or side effects. It does not address the many device selection parameters or how they affect typing. For such a complex input schema, the description is incomplete.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning to parameters; it only says 'Type text in the focused field.' The schema descriptions for each parameter are present, but the tool description does not prioritize or explain which parameters are most relevant for typing.

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 'Type text in the focused field' clearly states the action (type text) and the target (focused field). It distinguishes from siblings like 'fill' (which may fill a form) and 'click' (non-text). However, it does not elaborate on what 'type' entails (e.g., append vs replace).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'fill' or 'press'. No prerequisites mentioned (e.g., field must be focused). The description does not help the agent decide when to use 'type'.

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