filmora_open_panel

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

Beyond annotations, it discloses selector strategies, version-resolved shortcuts, toggle-state behavior for auto_snap/auto_ripple, localization overrides, and that disabled or ambiguous controls never trigger fallbacks. These are useful behavioral details, though it does not elaborate on destructive side effects despite destructiveHint=true.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then adds three concise operational notes. It is compact and avoids filler, though the line-broken structure is slightly choppy.

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 tool with one parameter, no output schema, and a destructive annotation, the description covers operational quirks but omits what the 'panel' parameter accepts and does not describe side effects or return behavior. It is adequate but incomplete for safe invocation.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for the single required 'panel' parameter, but the description provides no details on allowed panel values, format, or examples. It mentions ui_target_overrides, which is not a parameter, leaving the parameter semantics largely undocumented.

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 and resource: 'Open a Filmora X/10+ panel using live controls, exact-label selectors, or a version-resolved shortcut.' It distinguishes the tool from generic UI actions by emphasizing panel-specific opening methods, though it does not explicitly contrast with siblings like filmora_windows or filmora_ui_action.

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 gives operational context such as toolbar toggles being state toggles and the need to configure ui_target_overrides for localized layouts. However, it does not explicitly say when to choose this tool over alternatives like filmora_ui_action or filmora_windows, leaving usage selection implied.

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