get_live_view_url

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description explicitly states the agent cannot access the console via API key and that the owner must be signed into Glasswarp. This provides critical behavioral context not available from annotations alone.

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 brief and front-loaded with the essential action, using three focused sentences without unnecessary detail. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is largely complete. It could optionally mention that it returns a URL string, but this is implicit and not required.

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?

The single parameter 'session_id' is fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The tool description does not add additional semantics beyond the schema, resulting in a neutral score.

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 it returns the console Live View URL for the rig owner, specifying the exact resource and action. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'observe' or 'get_session_status' by focusing on a high-frequency live view for human intervention.

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 advises offering the tool on 'long or sensitive tasks' and notes it is read-only, giving clear context for use. It lacks explicit alternatives but the purpose is narrow enough that the usage is well implied.

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