app_launch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose side effects, such as whether the app launches in the foreground, any permissions required, or if it returns a status. The description also fails to mention that the timeout and consolePty parameters relate to capturing console output, which is a behavioral trait.

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 that is brief and to the point, with no unnecessary words. It could benefit from a second sentence to provide usage guidance or behavioral context, but given the tool's straightforward purpose, the length is acceptable.

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 that the tool has 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is somewhat lacking. It does not explain the return value (e.g., if it returns a status or error) or the interaction between parameters like 'consolePty' and 'timeout.' This is a moderate gap for an app launch 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 the baseline is 3. The description adds value by implying the tool is for launching, but it does not explicitly explain 'consolePty' or 'timeout' in context of app launch behavior, reducing potential clarity. However, the schema itself is well-documented, so the added value is minimal, justifying a slight increase over baseline.

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 verb 'Launch' and the resource 'an installed app on a simulator.' It is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like app_install, app_terminate, and app_list, though it could benefit from mentioning the constraint that the app must already be installed.

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 for launching an app but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like app_install or app_terminate. It lacks guidance on prerequisites, such as the simulator being booted, which would help the agent decide when to use this tool.

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