goxel_open_gui

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of describing behavior. It does not say whether the call blocks until the window closes, what happens if the file is missing or Goxel is not installed, or whether it requires a graphical environment. 'Open the graphical window' hints at a side effect, but it discloses almost no operational behavior.

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?

One efficient sentence with the action front-loaded; nothing is redundant. It could carry one more sentence of behavioral detail without becoming bloated.

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?

This is a side-effecting GUI-launch tool with no annotations and no output schema, so the description must explain the side effects, whether it blocks, and what the caller gets back. It omits all of this, leaving significant gaps for a tool whose behavior is non-obvious.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage for the single file_path parameter, already documenting accepted .vox/.gox formats. The description adds no syntax or path-format detail beyond the schema, which is acceptable given the high coverage. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

A specific verb+resource: it opens the Goxel graphical window and loads a voxel model into it. This is clear enough for an agent to know what happens. However, it never contrasts itself with the sibling tools that create, export, or script models, so the distinction must be inferred from their names.

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 says nothing explicit about when to call this tool instead of a sibling, and it gives no prerequisites. For example, should it be used only for visual inspection after goxel_create_object, and is a display required? The agent must also infer that the tool is a GUI launcher from its name.

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