type_text

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the main behavior ('clear and type'), but it does not mention that clearing is conditional on clear_first, nor does it describe waiting behavior, element preconditions, or failure modes. The absolute phrasing 'Clear and type' is potentially misleading when clear_first is false.

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 concise sentence that directly states the core operation. There is no wasted wording or unnecessary detail.

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 large set of sibling browser automation tools, this description is incomplete for confident selection and invocation. It lacks usage context, alternative routing, and explanation of the clear_first behavior that the schema also fails to document.

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 schema already documents most parameters with 80% coverage. The description adds minimal semantic value, mostly by reinforcing the clearing behavior tied to clear_first. It does not elaborate on locator strategies or timeout semantics beyond the schema.

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 clear action ('clear and type') on a specific resource ('input field'). It is easy to understand what the tool does, though it does not explicitly contrast with similar sibling tools like fill_form, send_keys, or clear_field.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as fill_form, send_keys, or clear_field. The intended usage must be inferred from the name and description alone.

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