Open or close the main application menu

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

readOnlyHint=false is consistent with a toggle that mutates UI state. The description adds real context beyond annotations: it names the underlying implementation (PanelUI.show()/hide()) and warns that opening is a visible on-screen change that should be reverted, which annotations alone do not convey.

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?

Front-loads purpose in the first clause, then adds the ☰ anchor and the cleanup advice. The PanelUI.show()/hide() sentence is slightly implementation-detail heavy but is short and earns some keep as a hint about mechanism.

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 one-parameter UI toggle with no output schema and accurate annotations, the description covers what it does, the visible side effect, and the cleanup norm. Only minor gaps remain, such as idempotency when the menu is already in the target state.

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 100% and the single boolean 'open' is fully documented as 'true to open, false to close'. The description reinforces the open/close polarity but adds no format or edge-case detail (e.g. behavior when the menu is already open) beyond 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Open or close the application (hamburger) menu') and anchors it to a concrete UI affordance (the ☰ button), which disambiguates it from the many other menu/window siblings like browser_set_menubar_visibility.

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?

Gives a clear usage rule — 'close it again if you only needed to inspect it' — which tells the agent to restore state after inspection. No explicit comparison to alternatives such as browser_set_menubar_visibility or browser_open_about_page, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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