Touch the Switch screen

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

Annotations are all false, offering no meaningful behavioral signal. The description adds useful context about the coordinate system (1280x720) and action types, but does not disclose whether the tool blocks until completion, requires specific permissions, or has side effects beyond the input. This leaves some ambiguity.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the essential information (action types and coordinate system) without redundancy or extra filler. Every word earns its place.

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?

With 7 parameters, no output schema, and sparse annotations, the description is adequate but not comprehensive. It gives essential orientation but leaves questions about swipe endpoints, duration semantics, and sessionId usage. The schema fills some gaps, but the overall package is not rich.

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 only 14%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that x/y are native Switch coordinates and that action can be tap, long_press, or swipe, which helps interpret the core parameters. However, it does not explicitly explain endX/endY or durationMs, relying on schema defaults and inference.

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 sends touch inputs (tap, long press, swipe) to the Switch screen using native coordinates. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like ryubing_press_buttons and ryubing_set_sticks, which handle other input types.

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 the tool is for touchscreen interactions, providing clear context for when it applies (e.g., tapping UI elements) versus other input tools. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, so it falls just short of full explicit guidance.

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