keyboard_release_all

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

Beyond the annotations (idempotentHint, destructiveHint), the description adds that only keys tracked by this session are released, and that the VM lock persists. This is valuable behavioral context for the agent, covering scope and state after the call.

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 two concise sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second provides a critical next-step instruction. No word is wasted, and the structure is front-loaded with the action.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description fully covers what the tool does and what the agent should do next. The session-scope clarification and lock reminder complete the context without needing to explain return values.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema reflects that completely. Per the baseline for zero parameters, the description does not need to add parameter details, and it does not. The description focuses on behavior rather than parameters, which 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 clearly states the action: 'Release every keyboard key tracked as held by this session.' It uses a specific verb and identifies the resource ('every keyboard key'), and the scope ('by this session') distinguishes it from global key release tools or mouse_release_all.

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 provides clear context: after releasing keys, the VM remains locked and the user should call vm_unlock. This gives a directive for a typical usage flow, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions (e.g., when not to use).

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