play_content_open

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that a browser is opened, that text is returned, and that URL slug mapping is already resolved (removing a real source of agent error). However it says nothing about auth/session requirements (a store_browser_session sibling exists), rate limits, or side effects.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and purpose, followed by the slug caveat and the valid-value list. Every sentence earns its place, though it is slightly sprawling with three distinct ideas.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no expansion; the description's 'return its text' suffices. The form-value enumeration closes the biggest gap left by the schema. Missing auth/session context for a browser-opening tool is the notable remaining omission.

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?

Schema coverage is 0% and the form parameter has no enum, so the description must compensate. It does so by enumerating valid form values (privacy_policy, ads, app_access, government, financial, health, data_safety, content_rating) and clarifying that slugs differ from names. package_name remains unexplained, keeping this below a 5.

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 verb and resource: 'Open an App content declaration in the browser and return its text.' This is clearly distinct from siblings like play_content_answer or play_content_save. It does not explicitly contrast itself with play_content_options, but the role (open/read a declaration) is unmistakable.

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 clear context: 'Use it to see the questions and options before answering.' This implies it belongs earlier in the workflow than answer/save siblings. No explicit when-not guidance or named alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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