start_launch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses session tracking, PID/PGID cleanup, and persistence across reconnections, but lacks details on potential side effects, system requirements, or error handling.

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 well-structured with sections (headline, explanation, Args, Returns) and is front-loaded with the core purpose. It is concise but could be slightly more efficient by removing redundant phrasing.

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 presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers return values (ID, PID, PGID, status). It explains session persistence and tracking, but does not address error scenarios or behavior when the launch fails.

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 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds minor clarification (e.g., 'optional parameters to pass to launch') but does not significantly enhance understanding 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 'Start a ROS2 launch file and track the session,' specifying a concrete verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'test_launch_file' or 'stop_launch' by focusing on starting a new session with PID/PGID tracking.

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 for starting launch files but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'test_launch_file' or 'validate_launch_file'. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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