nex_browser_type

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose that input is sent via sequential key events, which is useful context beyond the schema, but it omits focus requirements, whether existing text is cleared, error behavior, and what side effects key-event typing may trigger.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is tightly scoped to the tool's core 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?

For a 5-parameter action tool with no annotations and no output schema, one sentence is not enough. The description leaves out alternative-tool routing, delay semantics, and behavioral detail around typing, so it does not fully prepare an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 only 60%, and the description adds no parameter-level meaning. It does not explain the delay parameter, text format, or target syntax; target and pageId/sessionId details come entirely from the schema, while text and delay are undocumented in both places.

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 a specific verb and resource: type text into an element. It does not, however, differentiate this tool from siblings such as nex_browser_fill_form, nex_browser_press_key, or nex_browser_fill_credentials, so an agent still has to infer when this is the right typing tool.

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 guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives like nex_browser_fill_form, nex_browser_press_key, or nex_browser_select_option. The description does not state prerequisites, exclusions, or routing conditions.

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