type_into

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that typing is done into an open tab, uses ref from read_tab, and explains the submit behavior. It does not mention potential side effects or rate limits, but the core behavior is well described.

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 concise with a clear summary, followed by Args and Returns sections. Each sentence serves a purpose, and the structure is front-loaded with the main action.

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 description covers the main use case and return value (url and ref count). It implies prerequisites like an open tab and existing ref, but doesn't explicitly list error conditions. Given the output schema exists, this is largely adequate.

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?

All four parameters are explained in the Args section: tab_id, ref (with example 'e7'), text, and submit (with behavior details). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema titles, compensating for 0% 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 explicitly states 'Type text into a form field in an open tab, by its ref,' providing a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like click and press_key, which have different actions.

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 gives explicit guidance on when to use the submit parameter (true for search boxes/simple forms, false when a button click is needed). It also implies when not to use submit by suggesting clicking the submit button's ref instead.

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