press

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It states the tool focuses and presses a key, but does not disclose details like whether keydown/keyup events are sent, how invalid keys are handled, or side effects if the element isn't found. This is basic transparency but adequate for a simple action.

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 immediately states the operation and gives examples. Every word earns its place, with no filler.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, no output schema, and no annotations, the description plus the well-documented schema is sufficient for an agent to understand and invoke the tool. It could benefit from noting whether modifications or keyboard events are simulated, but it is complete enough for the task.

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 100%: both parameters (key and selector) have descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the examples, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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: focus an element and press a keyboard key. It includes concrete examples (Enter, Tab, Escape, ArrowDown) and distinguishes itself from siblings like type, click, and fill.

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 implies usage for keyboard interactions and gives examples of relevant keys. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives like type for text entry, so it slightly lacks exclusion guidance.

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