launch_app

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

Without annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It notes case-insensitivity but does not mention error handling (e.g., if app not found), return values, or side effects (e.g., if TV powers on automatically). This leaves gaps for an agent.

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 concise (three brief sentences), uses a clear 'Args:' structure, and contains no extraneous information. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Given an output schema exists (not shown but present), the description need not detail return values. It sufficiently explains the app_name parameter and references list_apps. Lacks mention of prerequisites (e.g., TV power state) but is otherwise complete for a simple launch action.

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 single parameter app_name is enriched with examples (Netflix, YouTube), case-insensitivity note, and a reference to list_apps. Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description provides all necessary semantic context.

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 it launches an application on the TV by name, which is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like list_apps (listing apps) and press_key (key input).

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 advises using list_apps() to see available apps, providing useful prerequisite guidance. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives or conditions like whether the TV must be on.

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