SendKeys

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds meaningful detail about the dispatched events and that keypress occurs only for printable characters, which is beyond what the schema provides. However, it doesn't mention side effects, focus requirements, or return values.

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?

Two sentences with no filler: the core purpose is front-loaded, followed by a precise behavioral detail. Every word earns its place.

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?

The schema richly covers all parameters, but with no output schema and no annotations, the description alone doesn't explain return behavior or when to prefer this over siblings. It gives the essential purpose and event detail, but leaves some selection context to inference.

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% with detailed per-parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already documents.

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 ('simulate keyboard input') and resource ('target element'), and clarifies the event sequence (keydown, keypress for printable characters, keyup). This clearly distinguishes it from the mouse-oriented sibling tools.

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 purpose statement implies use when keyboard input is needed, but there is no explicit when/when-not guidance or mention of alternatives like SetInputValue or BrowserEval. The agent must infer the use case from the tool name and description.

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