show_message

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

The description discloses a significant behavioral trait beyond annotations: it acquires the VM lease and locks the VM for the session. This adds valuable context about side effects and requires a companion tool call, which annotations do not convey. It does not contradict the annotations.

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 sentences long, front-loads the primary purpose, and then immediately presents the critical locking behavior. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant 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?

For a tool with one parameter, no output schema, and sibling tools like vm_lock and vm_unlock, the description provides all necessary context: what it does, the lease acquisition, the locked state, and the required unlock call. It is fully complete for an agent to use it correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention the 'message' parameter at all. The schema only provides the parameter name and type, leaving the description to compensate. Although the parameter is self-explanatory, the description fails to add any meaning beyond the schema, warranting a low score.

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 a specific verb ('Display') and resource ('a Windows 98 message dialog titled Windows 98 Remote Control'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by specifying the exact type of dialog and its title, which is unique among the tool list.

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 states that the tool acquires the VM lease and leaves the VM locked, with a direct call-to-action to use vm_unlock when finished. This provides clear context for when to use the tool and the necessary follow-up, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives.

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