ui_monitor_start

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

Annotations include only openWorldHint=false, providing minimal behavioral cues. The description adds no further details on side effects, whether starting a monitor is destructive, or what cleaning is required, leaving significant behavioral ambiguity.

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 very short and front-loaded, but it sacrifices essential information. Every word counts, but key details about parameters and behavior are missing, making it under-specified rather than concise.

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 complexity (8 parameters, no output schema, no parameter descriptions), the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain how to configure the monitor or what happens when it starts, leaving the agent without critical operational knowledge.

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 has 8 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description adds no meaning to any parameter. The term 'selector-scoped' hints at some parameters but fails to clarify which ones or their formats.

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 the verb 'Start' and resource 'UI monitor' with qualifiers 'selector-scoped' and 'semantic', giving a clear purpose. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like ui_monitor_events or ui_monitor_poll, which are also UI monitoring tools.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no indication of prerequisites, appropriate contexts, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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