vibeside_autofill_form

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, yet it omits all side-effect disclosure. It never warns that clearExisting wipes user data or that submitAfterFill triggers a form submission/navigation, nor does it mention permissions or what the call returns. 'Smart one-click' is marketing, not behavior.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the core capability is stated before the supporting mechanisms. Nothing in it is redundant.

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?

With 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate, but for a mutating tool that can clear fields and auto-submit it should disclose those consequences and roughly what it returns (e.g., filled-field count or mapping). These gaps are meaningful, not cosmetic.

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 all five parameters are already documented in the schema. The description lightly echoes locale ('English/Korean') and custom overrides but adds no syntax, selector-resolution rules, or precedence details beyond what the schema says, so the baseline 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 names a specific verb and resource ('form autofill') and even sketches the mechanism (locale dictionaries, field heuristics, custom overrides). It is clear what the tool does, but it never contrasts itself with adjacent siblings such as vibeside_type or vibeside_inspect_form_validation, so differentiation is left to inference.

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 explicit guidance on when to reach for this tool versus typing fields individually with vibeside_type, and no preconditions (form must be loaded, page connected) are stated. Only an implied 'use this to fill a form' reading is available.

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