tv_launch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does well by disclosing auto-detection, the MSIX fallback behavior, the msix_local_copy result flag, and the potentially slow ~330MB copy. It does not mention the kill_existing default behavior, though that is covered in the schema.

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, all relevant, with the primary action up front and critical fallback/time caveats included. No filler or redundancy.

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 cross-platform and MSIX fallback complexity, the description is robust: it covers fallback behavior, result flag, and timing. With no output schema, it only partially describes the return payload, but the main operational caveats an agent needs are present.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no special meaning for port or kill_existing beyond the schema, but it does not need to because the schema already documents both parameters.

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?

Description states a specific action (Launch TradingView Desktop with CDP enabled) and a clear resource. It is distinguishable from siblings like tv_health_check and tv_update by its launch focus, and adds platform-scanning context.

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 implies this is the way to start the Desktop app for remote debugging, but it never says when to use this tool vs alternatives or mentions any prerequisites/exclusions. With numerous tv_* siblings, explicit routing guidance is missing.

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