browser_type

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only states 'this does not submit the form', which is one behavioral trait. Missing are details about effects on focus, behavior on failure, what 'private text' means, and whether the action is atomic or reversible.

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 very short (one sentence) and front-loaded with the action. However, it is overly terse, sacrificing clarity and completeness. It earns a 3 for being concise but not well-structured for quick comprehension.

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?

Given the complexity (4 parameters, nested locator object, no output schema, many sibling tools), the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the required collaboration_id, the meaning of 'private text', the effect of replace_all, or the locator's role. The description is insufficient for an agent to use 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 description coverage is low (25%), and the tool description adds no parameter-level information. None of the four parameters are explained in the description. The locator's schema description is present but not repeated in the tool description. The description does not compensate for the low coverage.

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 action: focus a semantic control and insert text. It distinguishes from siblings like browser_click or browser_key by specifying the combination of focusing and typing. The phrase 'private text' is confusing but does not obscure the core purpose.

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 lacks any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'explicitly shared tab' as a context but does not explain prerequisites, when not to use it, or compare to sibling tools like browser_key or browser_focus.

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