press_key

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does supply two useful traits: the action applies to the currently focused element, and it returns the resulting snapshot. It does not disclose what happens on failure (no focused element, unknown key), whether the key is validated, or how snapshot inclusion is controlled.

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?

Three compact sentences, front-loaded with the core action and key examples, then the disambiguation. No filler text.

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?

An output schema exists and the description doesn't need to restate returns, yet it still briefly mentions the returned snapshot. The remaining gap is the unexplained `include_snapshot` flag, which matters for a tool whose stated output is a snapshot.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so partially for `key` by showing the chord syntax ('Shift+Tab') and sample values, but `include_snapshot` is never mentioned despite defaulting to true and changing the response payload. Half the parameter surface is therefore undocumented anywhere.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Press one key or chord') and scopes it to the focused element, so the agent knows no target selector is involved. It also enumerates concrete key values (Escape, Tab, Shift+Tab, ArrowDown) and explicitly separates itself from type_text.

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?

Names the alternative explicitly: 'Use `type_text` for text,' and the parenthetical examples ('Escape (close a dialog)') hint at intended scenarios. It stops short of stating exclusions relative to click/fill or any preconditions (e.g., that an element must already be focused).

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