tv_key

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

With no annotations, the description states that the tool sends a key press and enumerates accepted key names, which covers the direct behavior. It does not disclose invalid key handling, connection requirements, or what the call returns, though for a simple key-press action this is a moderate gap, not a contradiction.

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?

A single introductory sentence followed by a compact list of keys. The verb/object pair is front-loaded, and every word contributes useful information. No filler or redundancy.

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 essential parameters (key, count, delay) are fully documented in the schema, and the description covers the accepted key set. For a stateless remote-control action with no output schema, only minor details like error/return behavior are missing, which are not critical for correct invocation.

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 schema already describes all three parameters with 100% coverage, including defaults for count and delay. The description adds value by enumerating the allowed key names, which the schema does not provide as an enum, helping the agent choose valid inputs.

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 uses a specific verb ('Send') and resource ('remote control key press to the TV') and lists valid key names, making the function immediately clear. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like tv_play or tv_power, but the generic key-press scope is distinguishable.

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?

No when-to-use guidance is given. The description never mentions alternatives or when tv_key should be preferred over dedicated siblings such as tv_power, tv_volume, or tv_play. The overlap between the key list and these sibling tools creates ambiguity that is left unresolved.

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