browser_press_key

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the key press targets the focused element, which is important context. However, it does not mention potential side effects like form submission, navigation, or focus changes caused by keys such as Enter or Tab, nor what happens if nothing is focused.

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 an inline list of key examples. Every part is useful, and the structure makes the accepted values immediately visible without unnecessary prose.

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 input tool, the description is largely complete: it conveys the target, the key format, and common examples. An output schema is indicated, so return-value details are not required here. A little more detail about modifier formatting or unfocused-element behavior would make it fully comprehensive, but it is adequate for effective use.

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 schema only defines a bare 'key' string with zero description coverage. The description adds essential meaning by listing accepted key forms, including named keys, navigation keys, modifier chords, and single characters, which gives the agent a concrete understanding of what to pass.

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 uses a specific verb ('Press') with a clear resource ('a key on whatever has focus') and gives concrete examples such as 'Enter', 'Tab', 'Escape', and 'Control+a'. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like browser_type, browser_click, and browser_navigate.

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 when the tool should be used: when a keyboard key or shortcut needs to be sent to the currently focused element. However, it does not explicitly contrast it with browser_type for text input, nor does it state when not to use it, leaving the decision partly to inference.

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