octane_start_persistent_bridge

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 says 'open/manage the persistent bridge.' It does not explain what 'persistent' means, whether it blocks, requires a running Octane, or what side effects occur. The parameters dry_run and timeout_seconds are not explained.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it lacks structure and does not earn its place due to missing critical information. It is not overly verbose but is incomplete.

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 an output schema and two parameters with no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what the output represents or how the parameters affect behavior. The agent would struggle to invoke this tool correctly without additional knowledge.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. However, it provides no information about the meaning or effect of the two parameters (dry_run, timeout_seconds). The agent cannot infer how to use them correctly.

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 states it runs a specific Lua script via AppleScript to open/manage a persistent bridge, which gives a basic idea. However, it does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like octane_run_bridge and octane_run_oneshot_bridge, leaving ambiguity about when to use this specific tool.

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 the alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or situations that warrant a persistent bridge over a oneshot.

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