geck_open_data_dialog

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says the dialog is opened. It does not mention potential blocking behavior, focus changes, what happens if the dialog is already open, or any side effects related to the GUI session.

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, direct sentence with no filler words. The action and target are front-loaded, making it easy to scan and quick to parse.

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?

The description is too thin for a tool with three undocumented optional parameters and no annotation support. While an output schema may cover the return shape, the invocation context, parameter behavior, and operational side effects are left unexplained.

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 provides no meaning for the three parameters: handle, backend, and title_regex. An agent receiving this tool definition has no way to know what values to pass or why they matter.

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 identifies a specific action ('Open') and a specific resource ('GECK's File > Data dialog'), which clearly distinguishes it from most sibling tools at a glance. It does not elaborate on what the Data dialog is for, but the resource is concrete enough for practical use.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as geck_menu_select or geck_list_plugins. The description only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context from the sibling list.

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