window_send_key

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It accurately states that it sends special key events and supports modifiers, but it does not disclose whether the window must be focused, whether keys are pressed and released, or what side effects or return values to expect. This is acceptable but not deeply transparent.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the main action, lists useful examples, and mentions optional modifiers without any filler. Every part of the sentence 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 description and schema together cover the core invocation details, but the tool has no annotations or output schema. The absence of any guidance about focus requirements, side effects, or expected responses leaves a moderate gap for an agent deciding whether this tool will actually perform the desired action safely.

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 input schema already has 100% description coverage for all three parameters. The description adds a few key examples and the concept of 'special' keys, but it does not provide meaningful extra semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Send') with a clear resource ('special key events... to the target window') and concrete examples that distinguish it from text-oriented tools like window_type. It is immediately obvious what the tool does and how it differs from siblings.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: for special/control keys such as Enter, Escape, and arrow keys with optional modifiers. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough to route an agent correctly.

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