keyboard_release_all

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

Annotations already indicate idempotency and non-destructiveness. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations: it releases only keys tracked as held by this session, and it does not unlock the VM. This helps the agent understand side effects and prerequisites.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, with the core action front-loaded and the critical follow-up instruction placed second. Every word contributes to correct usage.

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 simple, idempotent release-all operation with one well-documented parameter, the description sufficiently covers the action, scope, and postcondition. It does not describe output or edge cases, but no output schema exists and the behavior is straightforward.

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% with a single vm_name parameter fully documented in the schema. The description does not need to repeat parameter details, and the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema handles the semantic burden.

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 ('Release') and a precise resource ('every keyboard key tracked as held by this session'), clearly distinguishing this from single-key tools like keyboard_key and from mouse_release_all. The session scoping adds necessary precision.

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 clearly implies when to use it (after keyboard input, to clear all held keys) and provides a crucial postcondition: the VM remains locked and vm_unlock should be called. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it.

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