ui_invoke_menu

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond them: undispatched unknown callbacks (validation semantics) and the possibility of a native file picker opening as a side effect.

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 short clauses, front-loaded with the core action, and no padding. Every phrase carries information (scope, validation behavior, side effect).

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?

For a one-parameter destructive action with no output schema, the description covers the main risk (destructive native dialog) and validation failure mode. It falls short only on guiding the agent to discover valid names before invoking.

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 coverage is 0% for the single 'name' parameter, so the description must compensate. 'By exact name' clarifies that the value must be a verbatim registered menu identifier, which is useful, but it omits where that name comes from and whether it is case-sensitive.

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?

States a specific verb (invoke) and resource (menu entry from installed XUI) with a scoping qualifier ('exact name'). It is reasonably distinguishable from siblings like ui_click and ui_list_menus, though it doesn't explicitly name which sibling handles the discovery or low-level-click cases.

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?

Implies usage via 'installed XUI by exact name' and the failure note about unknown callbacks, but never states when to prefer this over ui_click, ui_press_key, or ui_list_menus, nor that the name should first be discovered via ui_list_menus.

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