browser_press_key

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, indicating mutation. The description adds no further behavioral detail (e.g., event triggering, focus dependency, release behavior). It is consistent but does not go beyond annotations.

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 that front-loads the verb and resource. It is efficient and avoids wordiness, but it could include a brief usage hint (e.g., 'such as ArrowLeft or a') without becoming bloated.

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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, good annotations), the description is minimally adequate. However, it omits context like whether the key is pressed on the currently focused element or globally, and whether modifier keys (Ctrl, Shift) are supported as single key presses.

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%, and the schema's parameter description ('Name of the key to press or a character to generate, such as ArrowLeft or a') is already rich. The tool description adds no additional parameter information, so it does not improve on the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 'Press a key on the keyboard' clearly states the action (press) and the target (a key). It is specific enough to distinguish from mouse actions like browser_click or text entry like browser_type, though it could explicitly contrast with siblings (e.g., browser_type) for added clarity.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like browser_type (for typing strings) or browser_click (for clicking). There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., focus requirement) or context (e.g., pressing Enter to submit forms). The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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