open_page

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and only says 'switch'. It doesn't state whether a project must be loaded first, whether the switch is reversible, what happens on an invalid page name, or whether state is lost. Only the mutation-by-implication of 'switch' is conveyed.

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 short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the value list appended. No filler or repetition.

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 single-parameter navigation tool with no output schema, the description covers the essentials of what to pass. It is still missing preconditions (project loaded?) and error behavior, which matter for an agent sequencing calls across the many project/timeline siblings.

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% and there is no enum, so the description must compensate; it does list the seven valid page names, which is the single most valuable piece of parameter information. However, it doesn't confirm exact casing/string format or whether other values are accepted, so the compensation is partial.

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?

Specific verb ('Switch') plus resource ('page') with the full set of valid page names enumerated, so an agent knows exactly what the tool does. It is clearly distinct from siblings like get_status or start_render, though it doesn't explicitly say it's a UI-navigation action.

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?

Usage is only implied: the enumeration of pages suggests the tool is for moving between application workspaces. There is no statement of when to use it (e.g., before adding a marker or after loading a project) and no exclusions, but no sibling competes for the same job, so the gap is modest.

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