Send a single keyboard key event to Affinity to trigger shortcuts, navigate dialogs, or move focus. Supports keys like enter, esc, tab, arrows, and backspace.
Press one key, e.g. enter, esc, tab, up, down, backspace.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| key | Yes | ||
| screenshot_after | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not say where the key is sent, what happens when no element is focused, or that screenshot_after defaults to true, leaving the side-effect profile undisclosed for a tool with an implicit capture behavior.
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 no filler, appropriately sized for a simple action tool. It errs toward under-specification rather than verbosity.
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 2-parameter UI action tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description omits the screenshot side effect, focus requirements, and any return information. A caller cannot predict the observable outcome of the call.
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 exemplify valid key values for the required key parameter, but the second parameter, screenshot_after (default true), is never mentioned in the description or 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?
States a specific verb (press) and resource (one key) and gives concrete example keys (enter, esc, tab, up, down, backspace). It implies a single-key scope that distinguishes it from type_text and hotkey, though it never names those siblings explicitly.
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?
No guidance on when to use press_key versus type_text (for text) or hotkey (for combos), and no stated prerequisites such as the target needing focus. The examples hint at valid values but the agent must infer the single-key boundary on its own.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.