ibmi-mcp

send_keys

Type text directly into the active input field on an IBM i green-screen terminal by sending keystrokes to the current cursor position.

Instructions

Type text into the current input field at the cursor position.

Args: text: The text to type.

Returns the updated screen state.

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": {
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "send_keys"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`text`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0May 17, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

The description discloses that it 'Returns the updated screen state,' but with no annotations, it fails to explain other behaviors such as whether it works without an active input field, effect on special characters, or idempotency.

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 very concise at three sentences, front-loading the purpose. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple tool with one parameter, the description is adequate but minimal. It does not address edge cases, errors, or differentiation from sibling tools, but it covers the basic purpose and return value.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides a one-line description for the 'text' parameter ('The text to type'), adding minimal meaning beyond the schema's type and title. No additional constraints or format are given.

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 'Type text into the current input field at the cursor position,' specifying the verb ('type') and resource ('text into input field'). It also implicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool 'send_key' by targeting typing of multiple characters vs a single key.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'send_key' or 'set_cursor.' It does not mention prerequisites, context requirements, or scenarios where it should be avoided.

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

Deploy Server