apple_tv_press

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=false and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds genuinely new context: presses have no visual feedback, do not report focus, and are not auto-retried on uncertain failures. That is material for an agent planning a navigation sequence.

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?

Front-loaded purpose followed by behavioral caveats and an alternative tool, with no filler. The two sentences about lacking visual feedback and not reporting focus overlap slightly, but overall it is tight.

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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering the safety profile, the description need not explain return values; it instead supplies the operational caveats (no focus reporting, no retries) an agent needs. What remains unstated is how the non-idempotent navigation interacts with the count parameter.

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 documented count, action, and button fields, so the schema already carries parameter meaning. The description adds nothing about button/action semantics beyond what is in the schema, making 3 the appropriate baseline.

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 ('Press a remote button'), which is unambiguous and distinct from the playback/seek/skip siblings. It does not, however, enumerate the button set in prose, leaving that to the schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to apple_tv_screenshot when visible UI state must be inspected or verified, and warns that uncertain transport failures are not retried automatically. It gives no guidance on when to prefer other navigation siblings (seek, skip, playback) over pressing.

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