desktop_key

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

Discloses that input is sent to the currently focused window, which is important for predicting side effects. It does not describe repeat behavior of presses/interval or potential focus sensitivity, but these are not safety-critical and are partially inferred from parameter names.

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?

One concise sentence with illustrative examples and no redundant or filler text. The structure is clean and easy to parse.

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?

Provides essential context: what the tool does, example input, and focus behavior. It lacks explicit contrast with desktop_type/desktop_click and full parameter explanations, but is sufficient for straightforward invocation in most cases.

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 description clarifies 'keys' with examples, but 'presses' and 'interval' are not explained at all. Schema provides no descriptions, so the agent must infer their meaning from names and defaults, leaving incomplete parameter semantics.

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?

States a specific action (press) and resource (single key or chord) with concrete examples. Clearly differentiates from sibling tools like desktop_type and desktop_click by focusing on keyboard shortcuts and key chords.

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?

Examples imply common use cases (keyboard shortcuts, navigation), but the description does not explicitly state when to prefer this over desktop_type for text input or desktop_click for mouse actions. Usage guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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