send_keys

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action but lacks details on permissions needed, error handling (e.g., invalid session_id), rate limits, or what happens if the browser isn't ready. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to use it safely and effectively.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words, making it easy to parse. It's front-loaded with the core action, though its brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions like guidelines and transparency.

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 has an output schema (which reduces the need to describe return values) but no annotations and low parameter clarity, the description is minimally adequate. It states the basic purpose but lacks critical details for safe usage in a browser automation context, making it incomplete for effective agent operation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds no meaning beyond the schema. It doesn't explain what 'session_id' refers to (e.g., a browser instance) or what format 'keys' should be in (e.g., key names like 'Enter' or raw text). This fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation, making parameters unclear.

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 verb ('send') and resource ('keyboard keys') with the target ('to the browser'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from siblings like 'input_text' or 'set_element_value', which also involve browser input actions, leaving some ambiguity about when to choose this specific tool.

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. With siblings like 'input_text' and 'set_element_value' that handle text input, there's no indication of whether 'send_keys' is for special keys (e.g., Enter, Tab) or general typing, leading to potential misuse without further context.

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