davinci_switch_page

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'switches' a page, implying a mutation, but doesn't disclose any side effects, required state (e.g., whether Resolve must be running), or reversibility. This is a minimal level of transparency.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that states the verb and resource first, then lists valid values. There is no filler or redundancy; every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and parameters.

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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no annotations, output schema exists but not critical for invocation), the description provides all necessary information: what it does, what values the parameter accepts, and the expected effect. Nothing essential is missing.

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 a single required string parameter 'page' with zero description coverage and no enums. The description compensates fully by listing all accepted values ('media', 'cut', 'edit', 'fusion', 'color', 'fairlight', 'deliver'), which is exactly the semantic meaning an agent needs. This adds significant value beyond the bare schema.

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 action: 'Switches DaVinci Resolve workspace page' and enumerates all valid page values ('media', 'cut', 'edit', 'fusion', 'color', 'fairlight', 'deliver'). This specific verb+resource makes it unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools, which all handle different actions.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions, so an agent must infer usage from the tool's name and siblings. The description only states what the tool does, not when to pick it.

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