ui_text

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

The description mentions 'safely' but doesn't explain what that entails. No details on boundary behavior, permissions, or side effects. Annotations only provide openWorldHint: false, so description carries the burden but fails to disclose behavioral traits.

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), which is concise but at the cost of necessary detail. It could be restructured to front-load the purpose and include more context.

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 9 parameters and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It does not explain how to identify the target textbox, what action values are valid, or what 'safe replace' means. The tool's complexity requires more detailed guidance.

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 0%. Description only hints at action parameter values (read/replace) but doesn't clarify other 8 parameters like automation_id, xpath, selection_start, etc. No parameter descriptions 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?

Description states it reads or safely replaces text in a bounded TextBox, which is specific. However, it doesn't fully distinguish from sibling tools like ui_read_text and ui_set_value, which may have overlapping functionality.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives like ui_read_text or ui_set_value. No context on selecting between read and replace actions.

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