previewapk_press_key

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it is silent on whether the keypress targets the active device or the `device` param, what the call returns, or any side effects (navigation, focus loss, app changes). Only the keycode values are disclosed.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the verb first and the keycode mapping immediately after. Every token earns its place; there is no filler.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, 2 parameters at 0% schema coverage, and no description of the `device` parameter or post-keypress behavior, an agent lacks the context to call this tool confidently in a multi-device session.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does document meaningful `keycode` values (4=Back, 3=Home, 187=Recents, 66=Enter, 67=Delete), which is genuinely useful, but it never states that the field takes a raw Android keycode integer or explains the `device` parameter at all.

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 verb ('Send') and resource ('Android keycode') with the accepted values enumerated, which clearly separates it from siblings like previewapk_tap, previewapk_swipe and previewapk_type_text. It does not explicitly name those siblings, so it stops short of a 5.

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 says what the tool does but gives no guidance on when to use it versus tapping or typing text, no prerequisites, and no indication of which device it targets. Usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name.

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