press_key

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, and the description reinforces 'DESTRUCTIVE'. More valuably, it discloses the HID gating and approval requirement, which is not present in annotations. It also clarifies the expected key format (kvmd). No contradiction with 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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the verb and object. It includes a clear warning (DESTRUCTIVE) and a reference to gating, with no unnecessary words or repetition.

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 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the key format and the operational gating, but omits the roles of `confirm` and `profile`. The overall picture is adequate for a safe invocation, but understanding all parameters requires inference.

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 explains the `key` parameter with syntax examples and the kvmd code concept, but leaves `confirm` and `profile` undocumented. Since `key` is the primary required parameter, partial compensation is achieved, but gaps remain.

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 ('Press a single key') and specifies the resource (a kvmd key code) with concrete examples (Enter, Escape, F2). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like type_text and send_shortcut, which handle text strings or shortcuts.

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 for pressing single keys and provides gating conditions (KVM_PILOT_MCP_ALLOW_HID + approval). However, it does not explicitly compare with alternatives or state when not to use this tool, leaving the context for selection largely implied.

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