rba_ws_start

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'Start', which implies mutation, but doesn't disclose whether the process blocks, runs in background, requires an existing RBA setup, or what side effects (e.g., open ports) occur. This is a significant gap for a start tool.

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?

Exactly one sentence, front-loaded with the action and purpose. No filler words; every word contributes meaning. Highly concise and efficient for a simple tool.

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 simple start tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is adequate but leaves gaps: it doesn't mention the host/port parameters, potential long-running nature, or how to verify success. It is minimally sufficient for a low-complexity operation.

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 50% (host has a description, port does not). The tool description adds no details about parameters, failing to clarify port semantics or how host/port affect behavior. It does not compensate for the missing port description.

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?

Clear, specific verb+resource: 'Start the local RBA websocket bridge'. Distinguishes from siblings like rba_ws_stop and rba_ws_status by specifying the action and its purpose. The phrase 'used by the Lua autoloader' adds context that clarifies the tool's role.

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?

Usage is implied through context ('used by the Lua autoloader'), but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. Alternatives like rba_ws_stop or rba_ws_status are not mentioned. The description suggests this is the go-to for starting the bridge, but falls short of providing preconditions or exclusions.

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