navvi_record_start

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It reveals that recording uses screenshot polling, runs in background, and assembles MP4 on stop. However, it lacks details on destructive effects, rate limits, or required permissions.

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?

The description is very concise (two sentences), but it sacrifices parameter explanation. For a simple tool, this is acceptable, but additional detail on parameters would improve it without harming conciseness.

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?

The description is insufficient for a tool with two undocumented parameters and no annotations. It does not explain return values (though output schema exists), nor does it clarify important context like what 'duration' means or what 'persona' does.

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 the description does not mention the 'duration' or 'persona' parameters, leaving their meaning and usage entirely unclear. This is a major gap.

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 clearly states the tool starts recording via screenshot polling and mentions MP4 output. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'navvi_record_gif', though the output format (MP4 vs GIF) is implied.

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 when to use (to start recording) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives like 'navvi_record_gif'. No criteria for duration or persona are given.

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