type

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions the tool types 'at the current focus', but does not specify what happens if no element is focused, how special characters are handled, or whether the action is destructive. Additional context about keystroke simulation or speed is missing.

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 sentence with no extraneous information. Every word is necessary and contributes to understanding the tool's purpose. It is appropriately concise.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides the core functionality. However, it lacks edge-case handling (e.g., no focus), behavioral details, and usage context. It is minimally adequate but not thorough.

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?

The only parameter 'text' has no schema description (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It describes it as 'a string of text', which adds little beyond the schema. No details on format, length limits, or allowed characters are provided.

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 'a string of text', with context 'at the current focus'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'key' (single key presses) and 'write_clipboard' (clipboard operations).

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'key' for individual keystrokes or 'hold_key' for modifier keys. The description does not mention scenarios or exclusions.

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