cdp_press

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It discloses the core action and the focusing behavior, but it does not mention potential side effects of shortcut presses, error conditions, or absence of return values. This is adequate but lacks deeper transparency.

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 useful examples and no redundant words. Every element earns its place, making it highly efficient.

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 input action tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, key format examples, and the optional selector behavior. It could mention error handling or that a session must be active, but overall it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 low (33%), but the description compensates by explaining 'key' with examples and 'selector' with its focusing effect. Session_id is already described in the schema. Thus, the description adds meaningful semantic value beyond the schema.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Press') and resource ('key or shortcut') with concrete examples (Enter, Control+A), making the purpose unmistakable. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like cdp_type (text input) and cdp_click (mouse click).

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 usage through examples (e.g., shortcuts like Control+A) and the optional selector focusing behavior, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer cdp_press over alternatives like cdp_type or cdp_click, nor does it mention any exclusions.

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