press_keys

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

In the absence of annotations, the description covers return format (JSON with ok, action, instance, detail), failure conditions, and references observe/settle_ms as used in click(). It does not detail behavior for default parameter values or all edge cases, but provides sufficient transparency.

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 concise with 3-4 sentences, front-loads the action, and includes examples and a workflow tip. No redundant information, but the reference to click() could be more self-contained.

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?

Given 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the primary purpose, examples, return format, failure cases, and a usage scenario. It lacks detailed parameter descriptions but is adequate for a simple key-press tool.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must add meaning. It explains the 'keys' parameter with valid examples and syntax, but does not describe 'observe', 'instance', or 'settle_ms' in detail (just references click()). This adds partial value beyond 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?

The description clearly states that the tool presses a key or combo using xdotool syntax, and provides specific examples like 'Return', 'ctrl+a', etc. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like click, double_click, drag, scroll, and type_text by focusing on key presses.

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 gives explicit usage context, such as browser navigation sequence ('ctrl+l' → 'ctrl+a' → type_text(url) → 'Return'), and notes failure conditions (invalid keysym or dead instance). However, it does not explicitly exclude alternative tools.

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