Start App

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only states the action 'Launch an app' without disclosing side effects, permissions required, error behavior, or any implications for the device parameter. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's full operational impact.

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 that is front-loaded with the core action and resource. It wastes no words and is easy to parse quickly.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description gives no indication of return values, success/failure indicators, or what happens if the package is invalid. It also fails to address the device parameter entirely. For a simple alias tool, this might be acceptable, but given the missing parameter explanation and behavioral context, it falls short.

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 mentions 'package name' but provides no format details, and completely omits the 'device' parameter. The agent is left without guidance on how to specify the device or what values are acceptable for either parameter.

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 verb 'Launch' and the resource 'app by package name', and explicitly identifies it as an alias for launch_app(package=...). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like lookup_app or list_apps, making the purpose 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?

The description implies that start_app is equivalent to launch_app, so it should be used whenever launching an app by package is intended. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention any alternative conditions beyond the alias relationship. This is a minor gap but largely acceptable given the alias clarity.

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