stremio_desktop_launch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses one useful trait – that it blocks waiting for the streaming server – but omits idempotency (behavior if already running), failure modes (app not installed), and why waiting matters for downstream playback. It adds some context but leaves meaningful state-changing behavior undisclosed.

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?

Two sentences, action front-loaded, with the trigger condition following. No filler or restated name/title – every clause adds operational value.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the timing guidance is present. However, for a process-spawning tool with no annotations and 0% parameter coverage, missing idempotency and error behavior leave the definition only minimally complete.

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% and the single parameter wait_seconds is never mentioned in the description. The phrase 'wait for its streaming server' hints at a waiting concept but does not explain that wait_seconds controls the timeout or what happens at its bound. With undocumented params, the description fails to compensate.

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?

It states a specific verb and resource ('Launch Stremio desktop on this machine') plus the consequence it waits for ('wait for its streaming server'). The purpose is unambiguous, but it does not differentiate itself from near-name siblings like stremio_desktop_open or stremio_desktop_status, so an agent must infer the boundary.

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 gives concrete triggers: 'Run this before asking the desktop app to play something' and 'after installing addons so the app pulls the new collection.' That is clear when-to-use guidance. It stops short of stating when NOT to call it (e.g., if the app is already running) or naming a preferred alternative.

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