Open Elementor editor

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

Beyond the annotations (which only say non-read-only, open-world, idempotent, non-destructive), the description discloses the blocking wait for editor readiness, the required ELIVE_WP_URL environment variable, how the editor URL is constructed from postId, the login-page failure mode, and that it returns the same status object as canvas_status. That is exactly the extra behavioral context the annotations do not carry.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and readiness condition, then parameters, failure handling, and the follow-up call. No filler or restated field names.

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 two-parameter navigation tool with no output schema, the description covers preconditions, both invocation modes, the auth failure path, return shape by reference, and the next step. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: the two parameters are alternatives ('pass either...or'), and postId implies an external dependency plus a specific derived URL. The only omission is clarifying which parameter wins if both are supplied.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Navigate the dedicated Chrome tab to the Elementor editor of a page') and states the completion condition ('wait until the editor ($e) is ready'). It is easy to distinguish from siblings like canvas_status and get_canvas_skeleton, which it explicitly hands off to.

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?

It gives explicit routing: supply either postId (with the ELIVE_WP_URL prerequisite) or a full editor url, and call get_canvas_skeleton after a successful open. It even covers the failure branch – ask the user to log in once and re-call open_editor – so the agent knows exactly what to do next in both paths.

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