hold

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose one genuinely useful trait beyond the schema: the buttons are automatically released after duration_ms. It omits blocking/wait semantics, whether it errors if a button is already held, and how it interacts with release_all.

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 tight sentence, front-loaded with the operation and ending with the release behavior. It earns its place, though at this length it leaves significant gaps rather than being optimally sized for a 3-parameter tool.

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 no annotations, no output schema, 0% schema coverage, and three parameters, the description should do far more. It leaves the agent without valid button values, snapshot_after_ms semantics, or any behavioral caveats needed to invoke the tool reliably.

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% and there are three parameters. The description touches buttons and duration_ms implicitly, but explains nothing about valid button identifiers (no enum), units beyond the name, or the purpose of snapshot_after_ms, which goes completely unmentioned.

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 names a specific verb (hold), the resource (several buttons), and the temporal parameter (duration_ms), making the core operation unambiguous. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the many related siblings such as press, trigger, stick, or release_all, so the agent gets no help disambiguating.

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?

There is no guidance on when to prefer hold over press, sequence, or stick, nor any note about prerequisites (e.g. whether buttons must be free, whether pressing is equivalent plus wait). The description states what happens but never when to choose it.

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