press_key

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mostly paraphrases the schema parameters and does not explain focus requirements, potential global or browser-level effects, or any side effects of pressing keys. This is minimal disclosure for a tool that simulates input.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every phrase earns its place, with no redundant or vague filler.

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 relatively simple tool with fully documented parameters, the description is minimally adequate. However, it omits important context such as when to use this tool versus type, and whether the key press targets the page or the browser UI, which an agent would need to call it correctly in the right situation.

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 100%, so the parameters are already well documented. The description adds no new semantic detail beyond summarizing modifier keys, repeat count, and keystroke delay, which is already visible in the 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 states a specific verb ('Press') and resource ('keyboard keys'), and lists configurable aspects such as modifiers, repeat count, and delay. It is clear enough to be distinguished from sibling tools like click, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from type.

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 when to use the tool — any time keyboard keys need to be pressed with modifiers or repetition — but it does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives like type or click. No exclusions or comparison to sibling tools are provided.

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