send_hotkey

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully explains that window_title focuses a target window before sending and that delay_ms controls inter-key timing, but it does not disclose failure behavior, permission or accessibility requirements, or what happens if the window title is not found.

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 definition is front-loaded with the purpose and then cleanly lists the three arguments. Every sentence is relevant, and the Args structure makes the parameter details easy to scan without unnecessary wording.

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 three-parameter keyboard automation tool with an output schema already present, the description covers the essential call semantics: target window, focus behavior, key syntax examples, and timing. The main remaining gap is behavioral safety and failure-mode context, which is notable because no annotations are supplied.

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 0%, so the description must supply parameter meaning, which it does well. It gives key-combination examples for keys, explains that window_title is an optional substring used for focusing, and clarifies that delay_ms is the delay between key events with a default of 50.

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 states a specific verb and resource: send keyboard shortcuts or keystrokes. It also specifies the target scope, the active window or a named application window, which clearly distinguishes it from the serial, process, BLE, and hardware-control siblings.

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 when the tool is useful by saying it sends hotkeys to the active window or a specified window. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or alternatives, so the agent must infer the appropriate context.

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