fmod_ui_showModelessDialog

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states basic behavior (shows dialog, returns widget) but omits details such as whether the dialog is non-modal (though name implies it), what triggers its closure, or any side effects. The description is minimal.

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 short (two sentences plus a tag) and front-loaded with the key action. Every sentence serves a purpose, and there is no wasted text.

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 simple tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but could be more complete. It fails to contrast with the sibling 'showModalDialog' tool, which would help an agent decide between them. Given no annotations, some additional context (e.g., non-blocking behavior) would improve completeness.

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 input schema has no parameters (0 parameters, 100% coverage). The description does not add parameter info because none exist. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description meets this without needing to add further meaning.

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 that the tool displays a dialog window and returns a sibling widget. It is specific about the verb ('displays') and resource ('dialog window'), but does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'fmod_ui_showModalDialog', though the name and the tag hint at modeless behavior.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., fmod_ui_showModalDialog). There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or context for appropriate use.

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