chrome_press

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the optional focusing of an element but omits details such as how the selected page is determined (tabId, urlContains, titleContains), the effect of waitMs (default 250), and error behavior when the element or page is not found. This is insufficient for a tool with an input schema.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant wording. The key action is stated first, and the optional focusing behavior adds useful context without excess.

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 tool with 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain the selection of the target page, the reason for waitMs, or potential return/error information, so it is not complete enough for an agent to invoke with confidence.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only clarifies the roles of 'key' (keyboard key) and 'selector' (element to focus), while leaving tabId, waitMs, debugUrl, urlContains, and titleContains largely unexplained. The term 'selected page' hints at tab selection but does not define the parameters.

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 the tool sends a keyboard key to the selected page, with an optional element-focus step. This uses a specific verb and resource, and the sibling list (chrome_click, chrome_type, chrome_select) shows distinct functionality, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 when you need to press a key, but does not explicitly compare with alternatives like chrome_type or chrome_click. It mentions the optional focusing behavior, giving some context, but lacks explicit when-to-use or exclusion guidance.

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