terminal.keys

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool lists key expressions and supports arbitrary combos, but does not disclose any limitations, side effects, or whether the list is fixed or dynamic. Basic transparency is adequate.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose ('List available key expressions...'). The second sentence adds a valuable detail without redundancy. No wasted words.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains the return value (a list of key expressions grouped by category). For a simple listing tool with no parameters, this is sufficient, though more detail on the grouping format could be provided.

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?

The tool has zero parameters; baseline is 4 per guidelines. The description adds meaning by explaining the output structure (grouped by category) and flexibility (arbitrary combos), exceeding the schema's empty definition.

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 explicitly states the tool lists available key expressions for terminal.press, grouped by category. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like terminal.press (which performs key presses) and terminal.type (text input).

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: use this tool to discover key expressions for terminal.press. It mentions support for arbitrary modifier+key combinations, but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative references.

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