Read Electron app paths + flags

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the inspector requirement, which is a key behavioral constraint. It also lists all returned values, providing good transparency for a read-only operation. No hidden side effects are mentioned, but none are expected.

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?

Two sentences, efficiently structured: first sentence enumerates outputs, second states prerequisite. No filler, front-loaded with key information.

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 fully explains what the tool returns and the prerequisite for successful execution. No output schema exists, but the listed items sufficiently cover expected results. Low complexity with a single parameter makes this complete.

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 has 100% description coverage for the one parameter ('id'). The description does not add additional meaning beyond 'Session id.' from the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate given full schema coverage, but no extra clarity is provided.

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 returns Electron app paths and flags, listing specific paths and properties. It unambiguously distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_console_messages' or 'get_ipc_log' by focusing on file system paths and app metadata.

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 specifies when to use (to retrieve app paths) and includes a critical prerequisite (inspector must be attached). It doesn't explicitly state when not to use or offer alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an AI agent.

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