open_ui

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions opening a web-based UI but doesn't specify whether this launches a browser, requires network access, affects system state, or has side effects. The parameter 'autoOpen' hints at browser behavior, but the description doesn't elaborate on this.

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 extremely concise - a single sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core action and target.

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 tool that presumably launches or interacts with a web interface, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the UI is for, what happens after it opens, whether it requires authentication, or what the expected user workflow is. With no annotations and no output schema, more context is needed.

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 100%, so the schema already documents the single parameter 'autoOpen' with its description and default value. The tool description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, but with zero required parameters and high schema coverage, the baseline is appropriately high.

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 'Open the web-based user interface' clearly states the action (open) and target (web-based UI), but it's somewhat vague about what exactly this UI represents or controls. It doesn't distinguish from the sibling tool 'render_mermaid' which appears to serve a different purpose (rendering diagrams).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives or in what context it should be invoked. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, dependencies, or typical scenarios for opening the UI.

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