launch_app

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

Annotations already convey mutability and open-world effects, but the description adds no behavioral detail beyond the bare fact of launching. It does not disclose whether the TV must already be powered on, whether an already-open app is brought to the foreground, or what happens if the requested app is unavailable.

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 short sentence with no filler, and the essential action is front-loaded. Nothing could be removed without losing content.

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 state-changing tool with no output schema, the description leaves important operational context unspecified, such as preconditions related to TV power or behavior for unsupported apps. The presence of power_on as a sibling makes the missing coordination guidance particularly notable.

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 fully documents the only parameter with 100% coverage ("Nom de l'application") and an enum restricting values. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the 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?

The description uses a specific verb ("Lance") and resource ("une application sur la TV"), making the core action clear. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling youtube_video, which may also launch something on the TV, but the enum in the schema disambiguates the supported targets.

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 given about when to choose launch_app over alternatives such as list_apps, youtube_video, or power_on. The intended use case is only implied by the tool name and one-line description.

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