launch_app

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and adequately discloses key behaviors: optional waiting, noActivate prevents focus stealing, and startMinimized for non-intrusive launches. However, it does not mention errors, permissions, or return behavior.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. Each sentence provides essential information: what the tool does and a key parameter hint.

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 no output schema, the description does not explain return values or whether the tool is synchronous. It covers the main purpose and two key parameters but lacks explicit mention of required fields (exePath) and process behavior after launch.

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 coverage is high (86%), so baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond schema by explaining noActivate's effect and suggesting combination with startMinimized for non-intrusive launches, providing usage context not in the 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 clearly states the action 'Launch a Windows .exe' and key optional behaviors like waiting for the first visible window and preventing focus stealing with noActivate. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like close_app or list_windows.

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 implies usage for launching executables and controlling focus, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., close_app). No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance provided.

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