send_enter

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the action but does not disclose potential side effects such as triggering a form submission, navigation, or whether it behaves like a discrete key press. However, for a simple key event, the basic behavior is clear, and the description does not mislead. It adds minimal context beyond the title.

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, concise sentence: '向当前页面发送 enter 回车键'. It is front-loaded with the action and target, contains zero filler, and fully communicates the tool's purpose without unnecessary detail. It is an efficient use of description space.

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 the tool's simplicity (zero parameters, no output schema), the description is nearly complete. It could optionally mention whether the keypress is a down/up event or if it waits for any resulting navigation, but such details are not critical for a basic Enter key send. The presence of sibling tools like 'send_key' adds context, but the description itself is adequate for this straightforward operation.

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 has no properties (0 parameters), so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately does not need to explain parameter semantics since there are none. The schema coverage is 100% (vacuously), and the description provides no additional parameter details, which is acceptable.

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 the action: '向当前页面发送 enter 回车键' (Send Enter key to the current page). The verb 'send' and resource 'current page' are specific, and it explicitly identifies the key (Enter). This distinguishes it from other key-related siblings like 'send_key' because it specifically targets the Enter key.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool vs alternatives. There is no mention of exclusions or preferred contexts. A sibling tool 'send_key' exists, but the description does not clarify whether 'send_enter' is intended for the common case of pressing Enter or if there are specific scenarios where it should be used instead.

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