hold_key

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions holding a key for a duration, but does not clarify whether the key is released afterward, whether this is blocking, or what effect 'app_ref' has on the behavior.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler words. It conveys the essential action and unit of measure efficiently, though it is minimal in substance.

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 has three parameters including a nested object, no annotations, and no output schema, yet the description only covers the basic hold action. An agent would not know how to construct a valid call involving 'app_ref' or what happens after the duration elapses.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented parameters. It adds that 'text' likely represents the key and 'duration' is in milliseconds, but it does not explain the 'app_ref' nested object at all.

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 states a specific action ('hold a key') and the duration unit ('ms'), clearly identifying what the tool does. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'key' or 'type', but the verb 'hold' makes the core purpose distinguishable.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'key', 'type', or 'left_mouse_down'. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or cases where holding a key is appropriate.

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