Touchpoint

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

press_key

Press a single key or a key combination, with an optional repeat count, for automating keyboard input on any desktop application.

Instructions

Press a key or key combination.

Single key: "enter", "tab", "escape", "f5", "backspace".
Combination: ["ctrl", "s"], ["ctrl", "shift", "p"], ["alt", "f4"].

Args:
    keys: A single key name, or a list of keys for a combination
          (all held together, then released in reverse order).
    repeat: Number of times to press (default 1).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "keys": "<keys>"
    },
    "name": "press_key"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`keys`	Yes
`repeat`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Mar 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description explains the core behavior: single keys and combinations, with the detail that all keys in a combination are held together and released in reverse order. The repeat parameter is also clarified. However, it does not specify system-wide vs. focused-window behavior or error handling, which would add completeness.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise with no wasted words. It uses bullet-style formatting for examples and clearly separates single vs. combination keys. Every sentence adds value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's low complexity (2 simple parameters, no nested objects), the description covers the essential functionality well. It explains key behavior and parameter usage. Could optionally mention that the tool requires an active window, but the description is sufficiently complete for a key-press tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description fully compensates. It explains the 'keys' parameter with clear examples of both single strings and list combinations, and clarifies that 'repeat' defaults to 1. This adds significant value beyond the bare schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool presses a key or key combination, with specific examples of single keys and combination lists. It effectively distinguishes from siblings like 'type_text' (typing strings) or 'click' (mouse actions).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides valid key examples and explains how combinations work (held together, reverse release), but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool vs. alternatives like 'type_text' for typing or 'focus' for activation. Implicit usage is clear but lacks explicit context for selection.

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