rws_start_program

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'Start RAPID execution'. It does not mention side effects (e.g., stopping other programs), prerequisites (e.g., mastership), or error states (e.g., behavior if already running).

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?

A single sentence with no wasted words, but some expansion (e.g., explaining modes) would improve clarity without losing conciseness. It is efficient but slightly underinformative.

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 (1 enum parameter, no annotations, no output schema), the description should include parameter explanation and behavioral notes. It fails to do so, leaving the agent underspecified.

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% and the description adds no explanation for the 'mode' parameter (enum: continue, reset). The agent must guess the meaning, so the description provides zero added value beyond the raw 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 verb 'Start' and the resource 'RAPID execution', and specifies the context 'on the controller via RWS'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like rws_stop_program and rws_reset_pp, making the purpose immediately clear.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, e.g., whether mastership is required, if the program must be loaded, or what the 'continue' vs 'reset' modes imply. The description gives no usage context or exclusion criteria.

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