launch_revit

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=true, so the risk profile is partly structured. The description adds the readiness-check behavior and the optionality of opening a file, but never explains what makes this 'destructive' (e.g., replacing an existing instance, losing unsaved state) or what credentials/installations are required.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that names the core action first and the two optional behaviors after. No padding.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, but with four undocumented parameters, a destructive/open-world annotation, and no mention of preconditions (is Revit already running? what if the version is installed twice?), the definition leaves notable gaps.

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%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It only maps to version ('installed Revit version') and file_path ('opens a model file'); timeout and language are completely unexplained, as is the accepted format for version selection.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Starts an installed Revit version') and enumerates the two side behaviors (optionally open a model, check bridge readiness). An agent can distinguish it from open_document and get_revit_status, though the description never names those siblings explicitly.

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 implied usage (bring Revit up before other operations, optionally loading a model) is readable from the wording, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no routing to alternatives like open_document for an already-running instance.

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