start_recording

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the key lifecycle traits: open-ended duration, coupling to stop_recording, and the single-concurrent-recording limit. It does not say what happens to frames during the recording or how they are later retrieved, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loading the core distinction (open-ended) before the when-to-use rationale and the workflow. No filler; every clause carries information.

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 no-annotation, no-output-schema tool the description covers the essential contract: how it starts, how it ends, and the concurrency limit. What is missing is any pointer to how captured frames are later consumed (e.g. via get_frame), which an agent producing a multi-step workflow would want.

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 all seven parameters are already documented in the schema, including defaults, enums, and override behavior. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Begin an OPEN-ENDED recording') plus its terminating condition ('runs until stop_recording is called'). This cleanly distinguishes it from the sibling 'record', which is implied to be fixed-duration.

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?

Explicitly says when to use this instead of 'record' (when the USER controls timing), gives concrete examples (drag, menu, animation), and prescribes the workflow: start on cue, tell the user to interact, then call stop_recording. It also notes the one-active-recording constraint.

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