launch_rqt_graph

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

Discloses 'via WebSocket server' but no annotations exist. Does not mention that it may open a web browser, require network access, or any side effects. Moderate transparency.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the action, no fluff. Perfectly sized.

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?

Adequate for a parameterless launch tool. Could mention that it requires a display or browser, but given simplicity, it's mostly 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?

No parameters to describe (schema is empty). Baseline 4 applies as description adds no param info, but none needed.

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?

Clearly states it launches rqt_graph GUI tool via WebSocket server, with an example. Distinguishes from siblings like launch_rviz or launch_gazebo by specifying the tool and visualization purpose.

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?

Provides an example but no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives (e.g., rqt_graph vs rviz). Implies usage for visualizing node connections but lacks exclusions or context.

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