config__open_relay

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

The description discloses the return values (relay URL, browser launch status, status) and the action of opening a browser form, but it does not detail side effects, required permissions, or behavior in failure cases. With no annotations, more behavioral context would be beneficial.

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 two concise sentences, front-loading the action and then listing return values. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundancy or filler.

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 has zero parameters and an output schema (referenced but not shown), the description adequately covers the action and return values. It is sufficient for an agent to understand what the tool does and what it returns.

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?

There are no parameters in the input schema, and the schema coverage is 100%. According to the guidelines, a baseline score of 4 applies when there are zero parameters, as the description does not need to explain 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 explicitly states the action ('open') and the resource ('relay configuration form for mnemo-mcp'), making it clear what the tool does. It also distinguishes itself from the generic sibling tool 'config' by specifying that it opens a browser form for relay configuration.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as the 'config' tool or other configuration methods. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or when not to use it.

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