Press Switch buttons

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

The description discloses the key behavioral trait: buttons are pressed simultaneously and held for a specified duration before release. Annotations provide no safety hints (all false), so the description carries the burden, and it does so well for a simple input tool. It does not mention side effects like blocking or output, but these are not critical.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and outcome. Every word is necessary and there is no fluff.

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 simple action tool, the description covers the core behavior and timing. The schema handles parameter details. It lacks an explicit statement about return values, but no output schema exists, and the action is straightforward enough that this is not a significant gap.

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 75% (3 of 4 params have descriptions). The description itself does not add detail about parameters beyond what the schema provides, and durationMs is left without a description. The baseline for high schema coverage is 3, and the description does not compensate for the missing parameter description.

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 tool's function: pressing one or more Nintendo Switch controller buttons simultaneously and releasing after a duration. It uses a specific verb ('Press') and resource ('Switch controller buttons'), and is distinct from sibling tools like ryubing_set_sticks or ryubing_touch.

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 clearly implies the tool is for button inputs, and no exclusions are stated. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, so it falls short of a 5. The context is clear: use this when you need digital button presses.

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