keyboard_hide

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden well: it discloses that the call waits for viewport recovery, that method=return may submit a form (a real side effect), and that tap_outside targets CSS pixel coordinates defaulting to the left edge. It omits failure behavior (e.g. what happens if no keyboard is open) and the response shape.

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 purpose sentence is front-loaded and the method glossary follows in priority order. The method enumeration is a long run-on that could be bulleted, but every clause carries information.

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 six-parameter, annotation-free tool with no output schema, the description covers the decision-relevant surface (method semantics, coordinates, waiting). Gaps around timeout, page/wait behavior, and error/return semantics keep it from being fully self-sufficient.

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 only 33%, and the description compensates by defining all four `method` enum values with distinct semantics and by specifying the units and default for x/y. It leaves `timeout` wholly unexplained, and page/wait are only covered by the schema itself.

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 and resource ("Close the keyboard") plus the scope of the operation ("wait for the viewport to recover"), and the method enumeration immediately makes it distinguishable from siblings like keyboard_show and keyboard_state.

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?

Explains the choice among the four methods with real user-facing semantics (blur = page-level, done = Safari's Done button, return = keyboard key that may submit a form, tap_outside = a page coordinate). It does not say when this tool is preferable to alternatives such as waiting via `wait` or checking via keyboard_state first, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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