start_desktop_console

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the GUI shares this process's accounts, which is useful context, but does not explain process execution/lifecycle, blocking behavior, permissions, or what happens to an existing console.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted text. It is appropriately concise, though the compression contributes to under-specification elsewhere.

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?

This is a 3-parameter tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage. The description does not compensate by explaining parameters, execution behavior, or usage boundaries, leaving major gaps for an operation that launches a local GUI from an app path.

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 the description does not mention app_path, port, or python_path. It provides no parameter meaning beyond the raw schema, so an agent must infer that app_path is the GUI executable or path to open.

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 states a clear verb and resource: opening a local GUI. It is specific enough to distinguish this from status/configuration siblings, but it does not explicitly differentiate its role relative to desktop_console_status or start_account_workspace.

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 phrase 'explicitly requested' hints at a usage condition, but there is no guidance on when to call this instead of desktop_console_status, configure_desktop_preferences, or workspace siblings. No alternatives or exclusions are given.

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