browser_press

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose the allowlist restriction, which is genuine behavioral context, but says nothing about what pressing does (e.g., acting on the focused element), whether an error is returned for unlisted keys, or the post-press effect.

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 bulk of the text is a 20-item enumeration that redundantly duplicates the input schema's enum, which does not earn its place. The useful content ('press one allowlisted key or combination') is a single short clause buried ahead of the redundant list.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the what and the allowed values. It is nonetheless missing focus/prerequisite context and error behavior that an agent would need to invoke it reliably.

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% and the single parameter is a fully enumerated enum, so the schema already documents every valid value. The description's list adds no format or syntax meaning beyond what the enum provides, giving the baseline 3.

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?

States a specific verb ('press') and resource ('one allowlisted key or combination'), which clearly separates it from siblings like browser_type and browser_click. It is clear, though it never explicitly names an alternative sibling to differentiate against.

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?

There is no guidance on when to reach for this tool versus browser_type (text entry) or browser_click, and no prerequisites such as an element needing focus. Usage is only weakly implied by the word 'press'.

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