start_gcode_interception

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool automatically loads safety-profile-based rules (temperature limits, feedrate caps, blocked commands) and returns a session ID and initial rules. However, it does not cover side effects like whether it stops existing sessions, idempotency, or authorization requirements.

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 with two short paragraphs plus a structured args/returns section. It front-loads the main purpose and key behavior, with no unnecessary words or repetitions.

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 the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description sufficiently covers the tool's behavior: starting a session with automatic rule loading and mentioning the return value. It could be more complete by addressing session lifecycle (e.g., whether starting a new session ends an existing one), but what is provided is adequate for a session-starting tool.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description compensates by defining printer_name as 'Target printer name' with examples ('ender3', 'voron-350'). This adds meaning beyond the schema type and helps the agent set the correct value.

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 action: start a real-time G-code interception session. It specifies the resource (session) and distinguishes from siblings like add_interception_rule and stop_gcode_interception by mentioning the automatic loading of safety rules and the option to add custom rules after.

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 implicitly guides usage by stating that you use this first to start a session, then add_interception_rule for custom rules. It provides context (loading safety rules) but does not explicitly list when not to use it or alternative scenarios like resuming a session.

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