browser_press

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

Annotations are minimal (readOnly false, destructive false, openWorld true) and do not describe side effects. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the action itself—no mention of timing, focus requirements, or what happens after the key press. It does not contradict annotations, but fails to disclose any meaningful 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 zero wasted words. It states the action and the exact keys, making it highly efficient for the agent to parse.

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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description conveys the core action. However, it lacks any context about when to use it (e.g., after focusing an element) or potential side effects. The agent must infer the browser context from the name alone, which is a notable gap.

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% (no description on the 'key' parameter). The description compensates partially by listing the allowed keys (Enter, Escape, Tab), giving the agent concrete examples. However, it does not clarify whether other keys are accepted, case sensitivity, or formatting, so coverage is incomplete.

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 clearly states the action (press) and the specific keys (Enter, Escape, Tab), distinguishing it from sibling tools like browser_click (mouse) and browser_type (text). It is a specific verb+resource, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 alternatives. It does not mention any context or exclusion criteria, leaving the agent to infer when pressing a key is appropriate. Sibling tools are not referenced, and no conditions are stated.

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