Open the host booth for a broadcast

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that the host key is held in memory and never stored, that the session persists until close_booth or end_broadcast, and that opening does not broadcast. It does not cover what happens if a booth is already open, whether the browser session times out, or the cost of launching a headless browser.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with what happens and immediately followed by the key constraint that it is off air. Dense but each sentence carries real information about lifecycle or credential handling.

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?

No output schema, so the description correctly focuses on state and lifecycle, and it covers credential handling, persistence, and downstream effects. The remaining gap is failure/edge behavior (already-open booth, invalid password) that an agent would want before invoking a stateful browser-launching tool.

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 100%, so every parameter is already documented, including the 'never stored' note on host_password. The description reinforces the host_password lifecycle but adds nothing about link vs. meeting_id or host_name, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Opens the host's seat for this broadcast') plus the execution environment ('headless browser on this computer') and the state ('off air'). The closing line 'Opening does not go live' explicitly separates it from the sibling tool go_live.

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?

Names the downstream tools that only function while the booth is open (go_live, play_video, set_start_time, set_visit_link, end_broadcast) and the two terminators (close_booth, end_broadcast), which tells an agent where this sits in the sequence. It stops short of an explicit 'do not call if a booth is already open — check booth_status first' condition.

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