openWayStation

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the primary behavior ('Opens the WayStation desktop application') but does not disclose prerequisites (e.g., app installed), potential side effects, or error behavior. This is adequate for a trivial action but lacks depth.

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 two short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the key trigger and action, making it easy to parse and act on.

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 (0 parameters, no output schema, minimal annotations), the description covers all essential information: when to call and what it does. It is complete for the intended use case.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the schema has no properties. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but none is needed. Baseline 4 for 0-param tools is appropriate here.

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 trigger phrase ('when users says 'Open WayStation'') and the action ('Opens the WayStation desktop application'). This is a specific verb+resource pair, and the trigger condition removes any ambiguity about its intended use.

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?

It explicitly says when to call this action: when the user says 'Open WayStation'. It does not mention when-not-to-use or alternatives, but for a simple command-driven tool, the trigger phrase serves as sufficient usage guidance.

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