wavexis_press_keys

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

Beyond annotations (which are minimal), the description discloses side effects: dispatches keyDown/keyUp pairs, no network requests, and return format. This adds value, but could mention more about focus requirements.

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 with four short lines, uses bullet points for side effects and returns, and front-loads the primary action. No unnecessary 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 the tool's simplicity and the presence of a rich schema and output schema, the description covers behavior, side effects, return format, and alternatives. Slight gap: it doesn't mention that the page must be focused, but overall sufficient.

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 has detailed descriptions for each parameter (text, delay, session_id). The description adds no further parameter-level details, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed.

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 verb 'Type' and the resource 'a sequence of characters at the page level without targeting an element.' It distinguishes from sibling tools like wavexis_key_down/up and wavexis_act.

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 provides alternatives: 'Use wavexis_key_down/wavexis_key_up instead for individual modifier-key control, or wavexis_act for natural-language typing.' This guides when not to use this tool.

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