ui_fullscreen

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. The term 'toggle' implies the tool switches between fullscreen and windowed states, but the description does not mention potential side effects, preconditions, or failure modes. Since the behavior is self-contained and reversible, a moderate score is appropriate.

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 a single, concise sentence containing only the essential action. It is front-loaded and free of filler, scoring high on conciseness.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the one-sentence description covers the core action adequately. However, it leaves some ambiguity about the exact state change and whether any feedback is provided, so it is not fully complete.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema is empty with 100% coverage (vacuous). The description does not need to elaborate on parameters, and it introduces no confusing parameter-related information, earning the baseline score of 4.

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 'Toggle TradingView fullscreen mode' uses a specific verb ('toggle') and a resource ('TradingView fullscreen mode'), clearly expressing the tool's function. No sibling tool references fullscreen, so it is easily distinguishable.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. However, because it is a unique toggle with no siblings performing this action, the usage context is implicitly understood, warranting a mid-range score.

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