press_key

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action. It does not disclose what happens if the window is not focused, whether the key press is synchronous, or whether invalid keys cause errors. Behavioral traits are minimal.

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?

Single sentence that front-loads the action and includes examples. No wasted words. Efficient and clear.

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 simple tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is adequate but leaves gaps: no explanation of return behavior, error handling, or prerequisites (e.g., window must be active). Could be more complete for an agent to use reliably.

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 coverage is 100% (both 'key' and 'window' described), so baseline is 3. The description adds an example for the key parameter but does not clarify the window structure or how to specify a chord (e.g., 'Control_L+a' format). Not much value beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states the action (press a keyboard key or chord) with concrete examples ('Return', 'Control_L+a'). The verb 'press' and resource 'keyboard key/chord' are specific. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'type_text' or 'click', though the difference is implicit.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'type_text' for text, 'click' for mouse actions). The description assumes the agent knows context, but does not provide when-not-to-use or mention prerequisites like window focus.

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