Launch Electron app via `npm run`

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses flag forwarding behavior and slower startup due to rebuild. However, it omits key traits like process lifecycle (background, needs stop_app), return behavior, and error handling. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 extremely concise: three sentences covering primary action, forwarding behavior, and usage context. No redundant words, main idea front-loaded. Excellent structure for quick comprehension.

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 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description explains the primary use case and key behaviors. However, it lacks details on session management, return value, and post-conditions, which are important given the tool's complexity and sibling tools like 'stop_app'.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with detailed parameter descriptions. The tool description adds context by explaining forwarding of specific flags and the slower startup reason in waitTimeoutMs. While helpful, it does not significantly enhance meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 spawns an Electron app via npm script, specifies typical script ('start') and project type (electron-forge). It distinguishes from siblings by noting this is for forge workspaces where dev server must come up first. Purpose is highly specific and unambiguous.

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 explicitly says 'Use this for an electron-forge workspace...' indicating when to use this tool. It mentions cwd must contain package.json and that forge rebuilds renderer, guiding usage. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it (e.g., for direct binary launch).

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