record_window_start

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It mentions that recording continues until stopped and includes default values for 'fps' and 'system_audio', but fails to disclose critical behavioral traits such as permissions needed, file format, error handling, or resource usage. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely involves system-level operations.

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 extremely concise with two sentences that directly address key aspects: the tool's action and default parameter values. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it front-loaded and efficient.

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 complexity of a recording tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 4 parameters (only 2 partially explained), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on output format, error conditions, prerequisites, and full parameter semantics, which are essential for safe and effective use.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for 'fps' (defaults to 10) and 'system_audio' (records global system audio), covering 2 of 4 parameters. However, it doesn't explain 'window_id' or 'output_path', leaving half the parameters without semantic context beyond the schema.

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 action ('Start recording a window') and specifies it continues 'until record_window_stop is called', which distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'record_window_duration'. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with all siblings like 'screenshot_window'.

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 implies usage by mentioning the dependency on 'record_window_stop' and default values, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'record_window_duration' or 'screenshot_window'. It provides some context but lacks clear exclusions or comparisons.

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