open_in_editor

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses non-blocking behavior, independent window operation, automatic reload detection, return of process id, and how to stop (close window). This is comprehensive for a launcher tool.

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 very concise, using four sentences to convey action, behavior, return value, and stop instructions. No fluff, well-structured.

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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: what it does, how it behaves with other tools, return value, and how to terminate. It is fully adequate.

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 single parameter 'filename' is implied to be a sprite file, but the description does not specify format or path conventions. Given 0% schema coverage, the description adds essential meaning but could be more precise.

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 that the tool opens a sprite in the Aseprite GUI for live viewing. It uses the specific verb-resource pair 'Open a sprite' and distinguishes from editing or export tools by focusing on live viewing.

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 explains that the window stays open for live viewing while editing with other tools, providing clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or point to alternatives like export_png for static exports.

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