clear_input

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It clearly explains the timeout default (7 seconds when 0 or None) and the exception behavior when the element isn't found, which are important operational details not visible in the schema.

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?

Three short sentences with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and each subsequent sentence adds distinct, valuable behavior (timeout default and exception). Perfectly 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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior: action, timeout default, and failure mode. It lacks explicit selector format guidance and any note about interaction side effects, but these are minor given the simplicity and the standard pattern shared with sibling tools.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaningful timeout semantics (0/None means 7 seconds) and implies the selector identifies the element. However, it does not clarify the selector format (e.g., CSS selector) or any constraints on timeout values beyond the default, leaving a partial gap.

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 states a specific action ('Clear an input field') and a clear resource. The verb is unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like type_text, send_keys, or set_value, so an agent can immediately identify what this tool does.

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 action itself implies the use case: clear an input field. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to use it versus alternatives like set_value('') or send_keys, nor any mention of prerequisites (e.g., element must be visible). This is adequate but leaves routing to the agent's inference.

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