tor_press_key

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

Annotations already indicate destructive, non-idempotent, and open-world behavior. The description adds no additional context, such as potential form submission or navigation triggering when pressing Enter, focus requirements, or whether the key press targets the active element or entire page.

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 with valuable examples. It is front-loaded and contains no superfluous information, making it an efficient definition.

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 tool is simple and an output schema exists, so return values are covered. However, the description omits potential side effects (e.g., pressing Enter may submit a form) and does not clarify the operational context (e.g., whether a page or element must be focused). Given the destructiveHint, more behavioral context would make it 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 only parameter 'key' has zero schema description coverage, but the description provides examples (Enter, Tab, Escape) that hint at the expected format. However, it doesn't specify the full set of accepted values, case sensitivity, or how to represent special keys, leaving some ambiguity.

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 action ('Press a keyboard key') and provides specific examples (Enter, Tab, Escape). It is easily distinguishable from sibling tools like tor_type (typing text) and tor_click (clicking).

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no prerequisites mentioned. The examples imply usage for key-based interactions, but this is indirect rather than explicit.

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