Long press

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

Annotations already signal readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds no new behavioral context—no mention of what the long press does, how the optional duration affects behavior, or any side effects. It merely restates the action without enriching the annotation information.

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 sentence with no filler, front-loaded with the verb and object. It is maximally concise, though this brevity contributes to incompleteness in other dimensions.

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 tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It covers the basic action and coordinates but leaves duration and serial unexplained, and provides no information about return values, side effects, or system behavior. The overall context is insufficient for an agent to fully understand or safely invoke the tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It implies x/y are coordinates but does not explain the serial parameter or the duration parameter (units, default, purpose). The description only weakly clarifies the meaning of the required parameters, leaving optional ones entirely ambiguous.

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 hold') and the target ('on screen at coordinates'), which distinguishes it from tap and swipe superficially. However, it does not explicitly name sibling tools or contrast with them, so it falls short of full differentiation.

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 tap or swipe. No mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or typical scenarios where long press is appropriate.

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