open

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

There are no annotations, so the description must carry the burden of transparency. It discloses that Thonny must be running and that the file is opened in the editor, but it does not cover failure behavior, whether the file must already exist, or effects on an active editor session.

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?

A single sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, then adds the necessary precondition compactly.

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 tool with no output schema, the description names the target, the local file source, and the main precondition. It omits failure-mode details, but the operation is simple enough that the description is likely sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 has no descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It clarifies that path refers to a file on the local computer, but it does not specify absolute vs. relative paths, file type restrictions, or handling of missing files. For a single obvious path parameter this is minimally adequate.

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 action 'Open' with a clear resource 'a file from the computer' and destination 'Thonny's editor'. The phrasing distinguishes it from sibling tools like read (content retrieval) and run_file (execution).

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?

Provides the essential prerequisite 'Thonny must be open' and implies the intended use case: opening a local file in Thonny's editor. It does not name alternative tools explicitly, but the context is clear enough.

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