open_panel

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the target widget and that it uses an internal API, but it does not mention potential side effects, preconditions, or error behavior. The action itself is simple and clearly described, which keeps this above a 2.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It communicates the action, target, and mechanism efficiently.

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 tool with one optional enum parameter, no output schema, and low complexity, the description plus schema fully specify how to invoke it. Nothing needed for a correct call is missing.

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 action parameter has a clear enum with a default noted. The description repeats the same vocabulary without adding meaning beyond the schema, 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?

States specific actions (open, close, toggle) and a concrete resource (the Trading Panel bottom widget paper_trading) plus the internal API used. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like ui_open_panel by narrowing to the paper_trading widget.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and it does not mention ui_open_panel as an alternative. However, the narrow scoping to the paper_trading bottom widget implies that this tool is for that specific panel.

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