browser_type

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only says 'Type text into editable element'. It fails to disclose whether text replaces existing content, how focus is handled, whether the element must already be editable, or what the submit option does. This is a minimal statement with no behavioral depth.

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 short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it is under-specified for a tool with 5 parameters and complex browser context, so it is not appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description carries the full contextual burden. It doesn't explain tab targeting, permissions, or return behavior, and it's too brief to give the agent enough context for confident selection and invocation. It's not completely empty, but it's clearly inadequate.

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% for all 5 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions, but it also doesn't need to since the schema already covers them.

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 clearly states the verb 'type' and the resource 'text into editable element', which communicates the core action. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from siblings like browser_paste_text or browser_press_key, so it falls short of a 5.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as browser_paste_text or browser_press_key. There are no usage contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions mentioned, leaving the agent to infer appropriateness.

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