dialog_handle

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses return info (dialog type, message, accepted status), failure condition (no dialog), and handling of prompt dialogs with text input. Comprehensive for a dialog handler.

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 sentences, front-loaded with main purpose, no unnecessary words. Efficient and clear.

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?

Main behavior well-described, but lacks explanation for tab_id parameter and accept parameter behavior (e.g., what happens if false). Output schema exists but param documentation is weak. Some gaps for a complete understanding.

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 coverage is 0%, but description only explains text parameter partially (for prompt dialogs). Does not explain accept or tab_id parameters or their behavior. Considerable gap in parameter documentation.

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?

Clearly states it handles open dialogs (alert/confirm/prompt), specifies verb 'handle' and resource 'dialog'. Distinguishes from sibling dialog_auto by mentioning pre-emptive handling.

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 to use when dialog is present, fails immediately otherwise, and suggests dialog_auto for pre-emptive handling. Provides clear when-to-use and when-not.

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