Start Local REST API

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and discloses important security context: binding to 127.0.0.1, bearer-token auth, token storage path, and 0600 permissions. It also states return values and how to stop the server. It does not cover edge behaviors such as what happens if the port is already in use or whether the process blocks, leaving some operational uncertainty.

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, front-loaded with the usage condition, and then covers behavior, return values, and lifecycle in four efficient sentences. Every sentence contributes useful information for invoking or managing the tool.

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 start-server tool with one schema-documented parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core contract: purpose, bind address, auth token, return values, and stop counterpart. It lacks some lifecycle/error detail, but the essential information an agent needs to start the service correctly is present.

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 single port parameter is fully documented in the schema, including default environment-variable fallback and the meaning of 0. The description adds no parameter-level guidance, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate when schema coverage is 100%.

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 states a specific verb and resource: starts a local REST API server bound to 127.0.0.1. It also distinguishes from the sibling ipc_stop by directing the agent to use that tool for stopping, so the agent can tell the pair apart without opening schemas.

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?

It gives an explicit condition for use: 'Use when another local program needs to request assets from this engine over HTTP.' It also names the complementary lifecycle tool, ipc_stop, so the agent has a clear alternative action for stopping rather than inferring it.

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