print_service

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It reveals the operation is a print through launchctl, implying a read-only action, but it does not explicitly state the absence of side effects, required permissions, or failure behavior for nonexistent targets.

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 short and well-structured: the first sentence states the tool's purpose, and the Args block provides parameter detail with examples. No filler, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 simple single-parameter, read-only diagnostic tool with an output schema, the description provides the essential call details: what it does and the target format. Minor gaps such as explicit usage guidance or side-effect disclosure do not prevent correct 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must document the parameter. It does so meaningfully by defining 'target' as a launchd target and providing concrete examples in both system and gui forms, adding value beyond the raw string type.

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 and resource: 'Print detailed state for a launchd target' and identifies the underlying command 'launchctl print'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that list or modify services.

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 implies this tool is for inspecting detailed state of a specific launchd target, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over list_services or other siblings, nor any exclusions. This is left to inference.

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