launch_app

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only mentions the new_instance parameter behavior. It does not state side effects like bringing the app to the foreground, behavior when the app is already running, or potential permission requirements. This leaves significant ambiguity.

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 extremely concise, using a single clear action statement followed by a structured Args section. Every word serves a purpose, with no fluff or repetition.

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 2-parameter tool, the description covers the core action and parameters, and an output schema exists so return values need not be described. However, it lacks any context about checking app status or behavior when an app is already running, and it does not relate to sibling tools, leaving minor 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?

The description adds meaning beyond the input schema by providing example app names for app_name and explaining the new_instance behavior. Since schema description coverage is 0%, this compensation is essential and well executed for both parameters.

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 tool's function with 'Launch an application' and provides concrete examples of app names. This verb+resource structure distinguishes it from sibling tools like quit_app, hide_app, and list_running_apps.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as is_app_running or list_running_apps. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., app must be installed) or scenarios where launching might not be appropriate.

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