simulator_open

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It merely says 'Open Simulator.app and display the specified device,' which implies it launches an app and selects a device, but it does not state whether this is a blocking call, whether it requires the simulator to be installed, or if it fails silently for uninstalled runtimes. The behavioral traits are underspecified.

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 exceptionally concise at 8 words, with no filler. However, it may be too concise—it omits critical behavioral details that could be added without sacrificing brevity. Still, it front-loads the action and avoids redundancy.

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 single parameter and lack of output schema, the description should cover setup, execution, and expected outcome. It lacks mention of fallback behavior (e.g., if device is not found), error handling, or typical use cases. For a tool with 42 siblings, this incomplete context hinders correct agent selection.

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 covers 100% of parameters with a single 'deviceId' described as 'Simulator UDID'. The description adds minimal value by linking the parameter to 'display the specified device'. Since schema coverage is complete and the description reinforces the parameter's role, a baseline of 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 verb 'Open' and the resource 'Simulator.app', and specifies that it 'display the specified device' via a deviceId. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like simulator_boot (which boots without necessarily opening the app interface) and simulator_list (which lists devices). The purpose is clear but could be slightly more specific about what 'display' entails.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as simulator_boot or simulator_list. It does not specify prerequisites (e.g., the device must already exist or the simulator must be installed) or mention that this tool should be used before launching apps. With 42 sibling tools, this lack of context makes it harder for an AI agent to select correctly.

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