wavexis_key_press

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

Annotations are present but provide minimal info (no readOnly, destructive, idempotent hints). The description adds valuable detail: side effects ('Dispatches a keydown/keypress/keyup sequence') and return format. It complements annotations well, though could mention requirement for active session.

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 concise (5 sentences), front-loaded with purpose, and structured logically: purpose, usage guidelines, side effects, return type. No redundant information.

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's simplicity, the description covers purpose, usage, side effects, and output. It could explicitly state that the key is pressed on the currently focused element (implied but not explicit). Output schema exists, so return values are documented. Nearly complete.

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 input schema already provides clear descriptions for both parameters ('key' and 'session_id'). The tool description does not add extra parameter information beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate given schema coverage.

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 'Press a single keyboard key on the focused element' with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from siblings wavexis_type and wavexis_fill, which are for typing strings or setting field values without individual key events.

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 explicitly instructs when to use alternatives: 'Use wavexis_type for typing full strings or wavexis_fill for setting field values without individual key events.' This provides clear context for tool selection.

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