start_openocd

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses starting a subprocess, duplicate detection, and error behavior for missing target_cfg. However, it does not mention side effects (e.g., resource usage), permissions, or what happens on failure (e.g., if OpenOCD is not installed).

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 three concise sentences plus parameter explanations. No redundant words. The key point ('start as subprocess') is front-loaded. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 tool has 2 optional parameters, no required ones, and an output schema. The description explains parameter defaults and error conditions. With output schema present, return values are covered. A minor gap: not documenting what happens on success (e.g., PID or status).

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 compensate. It adds meaning: interface_cfg is debug-probe config defaulting to ST-Link, target_cfg is chip config like 'target/stm32f4x.cfg'. It explains that leaving parameters empty uses project settings, which is valuable context beyond the 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 verb 'Start' and the resource 'OpenOCD as a subprocess'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like stop_openocd and connect by focusing on launching OpenOCD automatically. The mention of duplicate detection adds precision.

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 description explains when to use the tool (to avoid manual launch) and mentions that it won't start a duplicate. It also hints at prerequisites (target_cfg must be set somewhere or it errors). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives.

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