remote_share_server_start

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the start action and that it usually starts automatically; it does not describe side effects, idempotency, whether it errors if already running, or what the return value looks like. This is a significant gap for a mutation-like operation.

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, front-loaded with the action, and contains zero fluff. It is appropriately concise for the tool's simplicity.

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 is simple with one optional parameter, and the description provides the key context that it usually starts automatically. However, it does not explain what happens on start (e.g., background process, status output) or how to verify success, so it is not fully complete. For a straightforward start command, it is minimally adequate.

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 input schema already provides full coverage for the single 'port' parameter, including its default value. The description does not add any parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema offers, so the baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states the tool's action: 'Start the share server.' This is a specific verb+resource construction, and the parenthetical note 'usually starts automatically' provides additional context. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like remote_share_server_stop.

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 phrase 'usually starts automatically' implies the tool is only needed when the server is not already running, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of checking status first, and no alternatives named. Usage context is implied rather than spelled out.

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