opencode_tui_open_help

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

The description adds no behavioral detail beyond what the annotations already convey. The annotations declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description does not explain why opening a help dialog could be destructive or what state changes might occur. This is a missed opportunity to provide additional context.

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 zero wasted words. It communicates the action and context efficiently, earning its place without redundancy.

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, a full output schema, and complete parameter schema, the description is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly. The annotations cover safety traits, and the output schema covers return values, so nothing critical is missing.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage for the single 'directory' parameter with a clear description. The tool description does not mention this parameter, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting. No additional meaning is added.

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 specific verb ('Open'), a clear resource ('help dialog'), and a context ('in the TUI'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like opencode_tui_open_sessions or opencode_tui_open_models. An agent can immediately understand what this tool does without needing to inspect 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?

The intended usage is implied by the name and description: use this when the user needs help in the TUI. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison against alternative tools, so the agent must infer the usage context.

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