Send keyboard key presses to the active browser page, enabling interaction with forms, dialogs, and navigation using keys like Enter, Tab, Escape, or Backspace.
Press a keyboard key (Enter, Tab, Escape, ArrowDown, ...).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| key | Yes | Key name: 'Enter', 'Tab', 'Escape', 'Backspace', ... |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the action and key examples, but does not disclose where the key event is delivered (focused element), whether it can trigger navigation or form submission, or whether modifier combinations are supported.
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 with the key action front-loaded and illustrative examples attached. Every element earns its place with no repetition or 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?
For a one-parameter tool with full schema coverage and an output schema, the invocation details are mostly present. However, the lack of usage guidance and behavioral context about focus and side effects leaves the description barely adequate for an agent to make fully informed call decisions.
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 already documents the key parameter with examples, and schema description coverage is 100%. The description's examples mostly overlap with the schema and add little new semantic meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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 names a specific verb ('Press') and resource ('a keyboard key'), with concrete examples that make the action unmistakable. It is clearly distinct from siblings like browser_click, browser_type, and browser_scroll, even without explicit cross-references.
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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as browser_type, browser_select, or browser_click. The context is implied by the name, but no exclusions, prerequisites, or preferred use cases are stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.