chatgpt_record_start

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

Adds traits beyond the annotations: a fixed 10-minute recording window, credentials are not saved, and the webpage is not operated automatically. With readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false already declaring this is a non-idempotent mutation, these extra behavioral constraints are genuinely useful.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by behavioral constraints. No filler, though the sequencing of the manual-operation instruction is slightly compressed.

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 two-parameter start tool with an unannotated output, it covers purpose and key behavior (10-minute window, no credentials, no auto-web control). It omits the follow-up record_finish step and leaves the nested examples object under-explained, so an agent would still need the schema to call it precisely.

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 carry parameter meaning. It only hints that an exact name/ID should be filled in, without mapping the nested examples fields (name, project_id, conversation_id) or clarifying how the operation enum relates to them; the enum values are self-descriptive but largely do the explaining themselves.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: starting a recording of a real backend request for a project operation, with the user performing the action manually. The name and description pair make its role clear against siblings like chatgpt_preview_changes or chatgpt_execute_plan, though the counterpart chatgpt_record_finish is implied rather than named.

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 the workflow: start recording, then have the user manually perform the operation in the tool-selected tab. It does not explicitly state when to prefer this over preview_changes/execute_plan, nor that chatgpt_record_finish should follow to close the recording.

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