Submit Interactive Form

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

No annotations exist, so description must disclose behavior. It fails to mention side effects (navigation, validation), risk acknowledgment (ackRisks parameter), or return value (output schema exists but is not referenced).

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?

Single sentence is efficient and gets the point across without fluff. However, it could be slightly more descriptive without becoming verbose.

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?

Despite an output schema, description omits important context: required parameters (sessionId, targetRef), risk acknowledgment, and what 'daemon session/tab' implies. Leaves many gaps for the agent.

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 coverage is 100%, and descriptions adequately define parameters. Description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, but parameter names and types are clear enough for a 3.

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?

Description clearly states it submits a form or submit control, distinguishing it from interactive sibling tools like tb_click and tb_type. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from tb_approve or tb_cancel, which may also handle form 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. With many sibling tools (e.g., tb_click, tb_type), the agent lacks criteria for choosing submit over other interaction methods.

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