renforge_select_choice

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states 'select' without disclosing side effects (e.g., does it confirm? trigger the choice?), error handling (e.g., what if text/index not found?), or dependencies (e.g., menu must be visible). This is a significant gap for a state-changing action.

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 a single sentence of 12 words, front-loaded with the action, and contains no filler. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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?

The description covers the core action and primary parameters but omits context about return values, error behavior, and prerequisites. Since an output schema exists (per context signals), some return info may be covered elsewhere, but the lack of behavioral context makes this 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 coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaning to 'text' and 'index' by explaining they are ways to select and that text is preferred. However, it does not explain the required 'project_path' parameter or the default values, leaving part of the schema undocumented.

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 tool selects a menu choice, using a specific verb ('Select') and resource ('menu choice'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'renforge_list_choices' (which lists) and 'renforge_click_element' (which clicks UI elements) by focusing on selection from a menu.

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 provides clear usage context: use this tool when you need to select a menu choice, and choose 'visible text' (preferred) or 'index'. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives or mention prerequisites like listing choices first, but the narrow scope makes it clear when to use.

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