set_value

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

Beyond annotations (idempotent, not destructive), the description adds key behaviors: clearValue() runs first, triggers input/change/key events that may fire validation/autocomplete, and scrolls into view by default. This aligns with annotations and enriches agent understanding.

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 sentences with no redundancy: purpose, replacement behavior, event/side effects. Every sentence conveys distinct and necessary information. Highly 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 core behavior, events, and default scroll. Missing mention of error scenarios (e.g., element not found) but timeout parameter indirectly addresses waiting. Adequate for a simple input tool given sibling diversity.

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 100% so parameters are already documented. The description adds value by clarifying scrollToView default behavior and the character-by-character nature of typing, but does not elaborate on selector or value format. One useful addition.

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 clears an input/textarea and types text character by character, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like click_element or tap_element by focusing on form field text entry.

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 implies usage for typing into text fields but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like send_keys or execute_script. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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