classic_mac_key_press

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses pressing keys with modifiers but lacks details on side effects, failure behavior, permissions, or targeting context (e.g., need for focused target). Basic transparency but could be more thorough.

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?

Two concise, front-loaded sentences with no wasted words. Core action and examples provided efficiently.

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?

Adequate for a simple key press tool with 3 parameters all described. Missing return value information (e.g., success/failure) but overall sufficient given tool simplicity and schema richness.

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%, so baseline is 3. Description adds examples of keys and modifiers (e.g., Cmd+S) but does not significantly extend beyond schema descriptions. No additional semantics for the target parameter.

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 'Press a key with optional modifiers' and gives specific examples like Cmd+S, return, escape, arrows. It distinguishes from sibling tools like classic_mac_type_text and classic_mac_click.

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?

Provides clear use cases (keyboard shortcuts, special keys) and an example (Cmd+S), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with alternatives like type_text or click. Implicit guidance is present but not exhaustive.

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