Scene Open Mpv

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Detached' is a genuine behavioral disclosure (non-blocking, external process), but it says nothing about what happens if mpv is unavailable, whether the render must exist, or whether the call blocks or errors on failure.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, but it is arguably too terse for a tool with three undocumented parameters rather than efficiently complete.

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?

An output schema exists so return values needn't be explained, but for a 3-parameter tool with zero schema coverage the description leaves the mode parameter and the render prerequisite entirely unstated, which is not enough for correct invocation.

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 0% and the description mentions none of the three parameters. Critically, the 'mode' parameter (preview vs final, default preview) is the only semantically ambiguous input and the description never explains what it changes about playback.

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 ('Open') and resource ('a rendered scene') plus the delivery mechanism ('detached mpv window'), which distinguishes it from the render siblings that produce rather than display output. It does not name an explicit alternative, so sibling differentiation is only implied.

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 'rendered scene' implicitly signals a prerequisite (the scene must already be rendered), and the mode enum hints at preview vs final variants, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance or reference to scene_render_preview/scene_render_final as the steps that must precede it.

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