long_press

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It only restates the basic action without revealing behavioral details such as the default duration (though duration_ms exists in schema), side effects, or return values. This is insufficient for a tool that performs a timed press.

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 short sentence, which is concise. However, given the tool has four parameters and no annotations, it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise; it lacks necessary detail.

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 description is grossly incomplete: it omits parameter explanations, usage context, behavioral nuances, and output/return information. For a tool with four parameters and no annotations or output schema, this is far from sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 only 25% (only serial has a description). The description does not explain x, y, duration_ms, or serial semantics at all, failing to compensate for the schema gaps. It adds no value beyond what the schema already provides.

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 identifies the action ('Long-press') and the target ('x,y pixel coordinates'), which is specific and distinguishable from siblings like tap or swipe. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives, but the verb itself implies a distinct action.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like tap or swipe. It does not mention conditions, prerequisites, or scenarios where a long-press is appropriate.

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