send_key

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the tool is known to modify state. The description adds no further behavioral context, such as error handling on invalid keys, prerequisites (e.g., device must be on), or side effects. Since annotations already cover mutation, the description provides minimal additional transparency.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action. It is not verbose and serves the basic purpose, though it could include a brief usage note without sacrificing conciseness.

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 tool is simple, but the description lacks guidance on when to use it relative to specific key-handling siblings, and does not address error conditions or return behavior (though no output schema exists). Given the availability of specific tools, the description should clarify its role to be complete.

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?

The input schema fully describes the 'key' parameter with examples ('Home, Back, Play, Pause, Stop'), and schema coverage is 100%. The description itself does not add extra semantic meaning beyond the schema, so it does not need to compensate.

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 'Envoie une touche de telecommande' (Sends a remote control key) clearly identifies the action (send) and resource (key). It is distinct from siblings like power_on or volume_up, which target specific functions, but it does not explicitly state that it handles generic keys not covered by those tools.

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 the specific sibling tools (power_on, volume_up, etc.). It does not mention that specific key tools should be preferred for those functions, or that this tool is for arbitrary keys. The agent is left to infer the appropriate context.

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