digital_open_circuit

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits itself; it only says 'Open a .dig file'. It does not state whether this launches a GUI, whether it blocks or returns immediately, whether it modifies the file, or what happens if the app is not found. The macOS constraint is helpful but insufficient for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 with no filler or repetition. It front-loads the core action and resource. It could carry more useful detail, but it is not bloated.

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 has no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented optional parameter, the description is too sparse. An agent would likely need to infer 'app_path' semantics and the relationship to digital_load_circuit, which creates ambiguity in a family of similar circuit tools.

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 clarify both parameters. It implicitly suggests that 'path' is the .dig file path, but it does not explain 'app_path' at all, nor does it specify expected formats, defaults, or optionality 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 uses a specific verb ('Open'), a clear resource ('.dig file'), and the target environment ('modern Digital.app on macOS'), so an agent can tell what action is being performed. However, it does not explicitly differentiate this from the sibling 'digital_load_circuit', which could plausibly overlap with 'open'.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives like digital_load_circuit or digital_inspect_circuit. The description gives context about macOS and Digital.app but does not explain which sibling to choose for headless workflows or when this tool is inappropriate.

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