Use this guide first to learn how to work in Riverside: create studios, schedule recordings, and find the sign-in link and relevant screens.
How to work in Riverside (create studios and schedule recordings): its screens and the sign-in link. Call this first.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| task | No | What you want done in Riverside, in your words. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description indicates the guide exposes Riverside screens and a sign-in link, which hints at its output content. However, it does not explicitly say whether the tool is read-only, whether it performs any actions, or how the returned guidance is structured, leaving meaningful behavioral details unstated.
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?
Two short sentences carry the key purpose and first-use instruction without waste. The phrasing is slightly cryptic around 'its screens,' but the structure is front-loaded and efficient.
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 one-parameter guide tool with no output schema, the description covers what the guide contains and when to call it. It could add how the `task` input shapes the guidance or confirm that the tool is non-mutating, but it is largely complete for this complexity.
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%, and the single `task` parameter is already documented as the user's desired Riverside task. The description adds no additional meaning about how `task` affects the guide, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 identifies a guide to working in Riverside, covering screens and the sign-in link. It is specific enough to distinguish this orientation tool from the operational sibling tools, reinforced by 'Call this first,' though it could state more directly that it returns instructions rather than performing actions.
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?
'Call this first' gives explicit ordering guidance for first use, which is valuable against siblings like riverside_open and riverside_click. It does not name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the first-call instruction provides clear context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.