chrome_press

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions optional element focusing but fails to explain side effects (e.g., does it simulate keydown/keyup?), prerequisites (e.g., requiring a selected page), or the meaning of parameters like tabId, debugUrl, waitMs, urlContains, and titleContains.

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 sentence, making it concise and front-loaded with the main action. However, it is under-specified for a tool with 7 parameters; a more structured approach (e.g., bullet points) could improve clarity without sacrificing brevity.

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?

Given 7 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or how to configure target selection via urlContains/titleContains. The complexity of the tool demands more comprehensive documentation.

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 explain parameters. It only hints at 'key' and 'selector' via 'focusing an element', but does not describe tabId, waitMs, debugUrl, urlContains, or titleContains. This adds minimal value beyond 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 clearly states the action: sending a keyboard key to the selected page, with optional element focusing. It distinguishes from sibling tools like chrome_type (which types strings) and chrome_click (mouse clicks) by specifying 'keyboard key'.

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 (sending a single key press) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. For example, it does not contrast with chrome_type for text input or chrome_click for keyboard-based clicks.

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