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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing side effects. It transparently states that it starts a recording, automatically captures the initial app state, adds an appLaunch step, and returns a recordingId. It could go further by mentioning cancellation or behavior if a recording is already active, but the essential stateful consequences are disclosed.

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?

Two tight sentences convey purpose, automatic behavior, return value, and the follow-up workflow. Every clause contributes information, and the most important action is front-loaded.

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 tells the agent what the tool does, what it returns, and how to continue the workflow using flow_recording_action and flow_recording_save. Since there is no output schema, explicitly naming the recordingId return value is sufficient for correct invocation.

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%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond the return value and the downstream workflow, so it stays at the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 and resource: 'Start recording a new scenario on a device.' It also adds defining behavior—automatically capturing the initial app state and adding an appLaunch step—and names the returned recordingId. This clearly distinguishes it from flow_recording_action, flow_recording_save, and the other flow_recording_* 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 provides a clear usage workflow: call this to start, pass the recordingId to flow_recording_action for each step, then call flow_recording_save when done. It does not explicitly mention when to use flow_recording_cancel, but the primary selection guidance against the main siblings is present and useful.

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