input_text

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It says the tool drives the user's browser and inputs text, but does not explain whether existing text is replaced, whether events are triggered, whether the element must already be focused, or what errors can occur. Only minimal behavioral context is conveyed.

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 two sentences: a bracketed environment/usage note followed by a precise purpose statement. It is front-loaded, compact, and contains no redundant or wasted text.

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 purpose and usage context, and the schema fully covers parameters. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it omits important behavioral details for a browser input action, such as replacement behavior, event triggering, and failure modes.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters, including the optional xpath fallback and the intent field. The description adds no additional meaning about parameters. This meets the baseline for a fully described 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 specific verb and resource: 'Input text into an interactive input element.' It also clarifies the execution environment as a real Chrome browser via the OctoLimb extension. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the related sibling send_keys, 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 bracketed note gives a clear usage condition: 'use only when the task requires acting on a real website.' This tells the agent when this browser-based tool is appropriate. It does not name an alternative tool or elaborate on exclusions, but the context is strong enough for correct selection.

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