browser_aria_type

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

Discloses that it automatically clears existing content before input. With no annotations, this adds important behavioral context. Could mention event triggering but still good.

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?

Four concise sentences: purpose, workflow, auto-clear, advantage. No redundancy, efficient.

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?

Covers purpose, workflow, behavior, and stability advantage. Lacks error handling details but sufficient for low-complexity tool.

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 covers both params. Description adds value by explaining ref originates from aria snapshot and that text is input after clearing. Beyond schema.

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 it locates an element via a stable ref from the accessibility tree and inputs text. It specifies the verb '输入文本' and resource '元素', and distinguishes from CSS-based siblings by emphasizing stability.

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?

Explicitly mentions pairing with browser_aria_snapshot and workflow steps. Provides context for when to use (unstable CSS) but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives.

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