press_key

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

Annotations only include readOnlyHint: false, indicating a mutating action, but the description does not add behavioral details such as event firing, focus requirements, side effects, or return behavior. The description adds usage context but no additional behavioral traits beyond the annotation.

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, front-loading the purpose and then providing usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and when to use it. However, it omits any mention of return values or post-conditions, which could be relevant given the optional includeSnapshot parameter, though the schema covers that parameter's existence.

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 100%, so both parameters (key and includeSnapshot) are fully described in the JSON schema. The tool description adds no extra parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 clearly states the tool presses a key or key combination, which is a specific action on a specific resource. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like fill by explicitly mentioning keyboard shortcuts and special key combinations, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 explicit guidance on when to use the tool: 'Use this when other input methods like fill() cannot be used (e.g., keyboard shortcuts, navigation keys, or special key combinations).' It names an alternative (fill) and lists concrete use cases.

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