resolve_open_page

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action but does not disclose side effects, failure behavior for invalid page names, whether this is a safe navigation operation, or whether it changes any persistent state.

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 focused units: a front-loaded action sentence followed by a compact parameter listing. Every sentence contributes necessary information with no filler or repetition.

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 single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the action and all valid inputs. It is nearly complete, but it omits minimal context around what switching pages implies and what happens on invalid input, which matters more given the lack of annotations.

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 input schema provides no description or enum for the page parameter, so the description fully compensates by enumerating every valid value: 'media', 'cut', 'edit', 'fusion', 'color', 'fairlight', and 'deliver'. This is exactly the information needed to call the tool correctly.

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 gives a specific verb ('Switch'), a resource ('DaVinci Resolve'), and a target ('a specific page'). It is immediately clear what the tool does and is distinct from siblings like resolve_get_current_page by its mutable, action-oriented meaning.

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 tells the agent what the tool does, but gives no guidance on when to choose it over alternatives, when not to use it, or any exclusions. Usage must be inferred purely from the verb 'Switch.'

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