Press keys or key combinations to trigger browser actions, navigate forms, or use shortcuts. Return a fresh snapshot after the action when requested to save a turn.
Pulsa teclas o combinaciones: "Enter", "Escape", "Control+L", "Tab", "ArrowDown"... Varias separadas por espacio.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| keys | Yes | ||
| snapshot | No | Si true, devuelve el snapshot tras la acción (ahorra un turno) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that multiple keys are space-separated and gives examples, but it does not state focus requirements, whether presses go to the focused element or page, what side effects occur, or what is returned.
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 wasted preamble. The examples and the space-separation note are compact and useful.
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 two-parameter action with no output schema, the description covers key syntax adequately but omits focus and side-effect context. It is enough to attempt a call, but not enough to fully distinguish it from related browser input tools.
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 50%: the snapshot parameter is documented in the schema, while the required keys parameter is not. The description compensates partly by giving key examples and the space-separated sequence format, which adds meaningful syntax beyond the schema, though it is not exhaustive.
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 action ("Pulsa teclas") and resource (keys/combinations) with concrete examples such as "Enter" and "Control+L". It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling browser_type, but the verb and shortcut examples make the scope clear.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like browser_type, browser_click, or browser_select. The examples imply keyboard-shortcut scenarios, but the agent must infer the selection conditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.