open_bpmn

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It states the tool opens a file and sets context but does not disclose error behavior (e.g., if file not found), effect on unsaved changes, or whether the file is loaded into memory. Behavioral details are insufficient.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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's simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema), the description is largely complete. It states the action and outcome (set as current context). However, it could briefly mention what happens to the previous context or that the diagram is loaded for editing. Still, it covers the essential behavior.

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% with filename described as 'Filename of the BPMN diagram to open'. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 opens a BPMN file and sets it as current context. The verb 'open' and resource 'BPMN file' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like 'new_bpmn' (creates new) and 'open_mermaid_file' (opens mermaid files).

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 implies the tool is used to open an existing BPMN file, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., versus 'new_bpmn' or 'open_mermaid_file'). No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria are mentioned.

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