env_launch

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but fails completely. '启动环境' gives no indication of whether this is a read or write operation, what permissions might be required, whether it's destructive, what side effects occur, or what the expected behavior is. For a tool with 7 parameters and no output schema, this lack of behavioral information is critically inadequate.

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?

While technically concise with just two characters, this represents under-specification rather than effective brevity. The description doesn't earn its place - it provides no useful information beyond what's already in the tool name. For a complex tool with 7 parameters, this level of conciseness is inadequate and unhelpful.

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 complexity (7 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, multiple sibling tools), the description is completely inadequate. It provides no information about what the tool does, when to use it, what parameters mean, what behavior to expect, or what results are returned. The agent would be operating blindly with this tool, unable to make informed decisions about its invocation.

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?

With 7 parameters and 0% schema description coverage, the description provides zero information about any parameters. The schema shows parameters like 'id', 'number', 'openIpTab', 'startUpParam', 'headless', 'skipProxyCheck', and 'timeout', but the description doesn't mention any of them, explain their purposes, or provide context about how they affect the environment launch. This leaves all parameters completely undocumented.

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 '启动环境' (launch environment) is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'env_launch'. It provides no specific verb-resource combination, doesn't explain what 'environment' means in this context, and doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like env_create, env_opened, or env_terminate. The purpose remains vague and unhelpful for an agent trying to understand when to use this specific tool.

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 provides absolutely no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple sibling tools related to environments (env_create, env_opened, env_terminate, env_query, etc.), there's no indication whether this launches existing environments, creates new ones, or performs some specific type of environment initialization. The agent receives no context about prerequisites, appropriate scenarios, or tool selection criteria.

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