启动网易云音乐（macOS）

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

The description is transparent about the platform constraint and the error condition, which is a side-effect of the tool's behavior. The annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) align with a state-changing but non-destructive launch operation; there is no contradiction.

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 directly conveys the action, target, and platform limitation without any redundant wording. It is well-structured and easy to parse.

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 lack of parameters and output schema, the description covers the essential context: what the tool does, on which platform, and what happens on unsupported platforms. Success behavior is implicitly understood as launching the client.

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 tool has no parameters, so schema coverage is complete by default. The description accurately reflects this, requiring no additional parameter explanations.

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 tool's purpose: launching the installed official NetEase Cloud Music client via the macOS adapter. It distinguishes this from sibling tools that handle playlists, song details, or playback control, making the action unambiguous.

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?

It explicitly notes that on non-macOS platforms, a clear capability error will be returned, guiding the user on platform compatibility. While it doesn't mention alternatives like netease_control for playback, the launch action is sufficiently distinct to be understood.

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