ui_grid

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

The description implies both read and write actions (select may change state), but does not disclose side effects, permissions, or behavioral traits beyond the annotation openWorldHint=false. The annotation and description do not conflict, but the description adds little transparency.

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 extremely short (one sentence), which is concise but at the expense of necessary detail. It is not front-loaded with critical information, and the single sentence does not earn its place as it omits essential usage details.

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 8 parameters, no output schema, and a complex UI context, the description is insufficient. It does not explain how to identify the grid, what actions are valid, what is returned, or how to use parameters effectively. The description leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to fill.

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 does not explain any parameter meanings. The required 'action' parameter likely maps to the three verbs in the description, but no valid values or syntax are provided. Other parameters like automation_id, name, etc. are left completely unexplained.

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 states it is for 'WPF DataGrid row evidence' and lists three actions: read, select, assert. This provides a general purpose but is vague about what 'evidence' means and doesn't clearly distinguish from sibling tools like ui_select_items or ui_get_selected_item.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool instead of other UI interaction tools. Sibling tools such as ui_select_items and ui_get_selected_item exist, but no comparison or context is provided.

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