playwright__browser_type

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, and the description adds no behavioral context beyond the basic action. It does not disclose side effects such as submit behavior, triggering key handlers, or potential page changes. It is consistent with the annotations, so no contradiction, but it adds no extra transparency.

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 a single, direct sentence with no filler or redundant detail. The core action and target are front-loaded, and every word contributes to the meaning.

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?

For a simple text-entry tool, the schema and annotations cover parameter semantics and safety profile. However, the description lacks context about when to prefer this over fill_form or press_key, and it doesn't mention potential side effects like form submission. It is minimally viable but has clear 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?

The input schema covers 100% of the parameters with clear descriptions, including target, text, slowly, submit, and element. The description itself adds no parameter-specific meaning, so the schema carries the burden and the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 action ('Type') and a clear resource ('text into editable element'), so an agent can tell this is a text-entry tool. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from related siblings like fill_form or press_key, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as browser_fill_form, browser_press_key, or browser_click. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or scenario notes.

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