tv_press

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden and does so well. It discloses that durationMs causes a long-press, that repeat+intervalMs sends a burst, and that the tool returns the focused element after the press. These are valuable behavioral details beyond basic 'send a key'.

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?

Three concise sentences with the main action front-loaded. The key list is compact and the burst/long-press explanation is efficient. No filler or redundancy with the schema; every clause adds value.

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?

The description is complete for a tool of this complexity: it covers the input format, timing behaviors, and return value. The output schema is absent, but the description explicitly states what the call returns (focused element), making the tool self-contained. Sibling tools are many, but the description's clarity prevents confusion.

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 already describes all 5 parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining the combo effect of repeat+intervalMs as a burst and giving a concrete use case ('move several tiles'). It also clarifies that durationMs 'holds' the key, reinforcing the schema's long-press semantics.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Send a remote key.' It explicitly lists supported key names and raw numeric keyCodes, distinguishing this generic key-press tool from sibling tools like tv_menu or tv_goto. The description's scope (remote key press with timing options) leaves no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use the options: durationMs for long-press, repeat+intervalMs for bursts (e.g., moving several tiles). It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the description's focus on raw key presses implies it's the tool for direct input, while other tools like tv_sequence or tv_goto handle higher-level actions.

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