Launch the design gallery

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

With no annotations, the description covers key behaviors: starts a local web page, opens the browser, requires user interaction, and provides a fallback if the browser doesn't open. It also implies a return value (the URL). It doesn't discuss potential side effects or asynchronous behavior, but the core behaviors are disclosed.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds value: the workflow phase, what the tool does, the user interaction, and the fallback. No filler or 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?

Despite having only one parameter and no output schema, the description explains the tool's role, user interaction, next steps, and a fallback. It could mention prerequisites (e.g., project must exist) or whether it blocks, but it is largely complete for a simple launch tool.

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 one parameter (projectId) with no description, and the description does not mention or explain it. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description should compensate but doesn't, leaving the parameter's meaning entirely to its name.

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 clearly states the specific action: 'Starts a local web page... showing live UI style mockups' and provides context as 'Phase 3 of the App Factory workflow.' It distinguishes from siblings by explaining what the gallery does and how to proceed afterward.

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 description gives explicit workflow context ('Phase 3 of the App Factory workflow') and instructs to call get_design_choices after telling the user to make picks. While it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use, the workflow placement and next step provide clear usage guidance.

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