rhino_bridge_select_instance

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

Annotations only indicate readOnlyHint: false. The description adds that the active bridge client is closed and the next tool call uses lazy promotion, disclosing side effects and behavioral details beyond what annotations provide.

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, focused sentences with no wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded, and constraints are clearly presented.

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?

Given the low complexity and presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers all essential aspects: purpose, parameter constraint, and behavioral side effects. No gaps are evident.

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 description does not repeat parameter details already in the schema, but adds the critical constraint that exactly one selector must be set. The schema provides descriptions for each parameter, so the description adds value without redundancy.

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 tool's purpose: switching the next bridge call to target a specific Rhino session. It uses specific verbs and resources ('switch the next bridge call', 'target a specific Rhino session'), and distinguishes from sibling tools by describing a unique configuration action.

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 explicitly says exactly one selector (among pid, port, doc_path_contains, index) should be set, providing clear usage context. It lacks explicit when not to use or alternative tools, but the purpose is specific enough that no alternatives exist among siblings.

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