Start async display recording

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it discloses that the tool is non-blocking, allows concurrent input, and enforces one session per (serial, displayId). This complements the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true) without 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 two sentences, front-loaded with the key action and non-blocking distinction. Every word earns its place; no redundancy or irrelevant detail.

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 tool's simplicity, 2 required parameters, and existence of an output schema, the description covers essential aspects: purpose, non-blocking nature, session constraint, and integration with input tools. Minor omissions like error conditions or default storage location are acceptable.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that 'serial' is exact and must not be inferred, and that 'displayId' is a logical ID, not a physical one. This extra context helps the agent use parameters correctly.

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 specific verb 'Start' and resource 'non-blocking screenrecord on one logical display'. It distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing 'non-blocking' and the session constraint, which differentiates it from other recording tools like mobile_screen_record.

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 when input tools need to run during capture, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool. While the non-blocking nature hints at a comparison, it lacks explicit guidance on choosing between this and its siblings.

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