Open file

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing side effects. It mentions returning buffer info but does not disclose that opening a file may replace the current window (as implied by the split parameter default 'none') or create a new buffer, nor does it describe any other behavioral traits.

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 front-loads the primary action and includes the optional behavior and return value, with no redundant words.

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?

The description adequately covers the core function and return value, but given the absence of an output schema and annotations, it fails to provide usage context (when to use vs alternatives) or important behavioral details like window replacement. It is minimally viable but has clear gaps.

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?

Both parameters are already fully described in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description's mention of 'split or new tab' adds minimal value beyond the schema's enum descriptions. It does not clarify path handling (e.g., relative vs absolute, expansion) or split behavior specifics.

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 action (open a file), the target application (Neovim), the optional split/tab behavior, and the return value (buffer info). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like nvim_read_buffer (reads existing buffer) and nvim_list_buffers (lists buffers).

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like nvim_read_buffer or nvim_list_buffers, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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