screenstudio_record_control

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

Annotations flag destructiveHint=true, and the description usefully disambiguates which actions are destructive: restart and cancel 'discard', while finish 'returns the saved project'. That is genuine added context beyond the annotation, though it omits what happens to a recording if you pause and never resume.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler. The action enumeration is front-loaded and the trailing tip is a single clause that earns its place by preventing unnecessary pauses.

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?

With one param and no output schema, the description covers what an agent needs, including that finish yields the saved project. It could be slightly more complete about the prerequisite that an active recording must exist before any control action is valid.

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 coverage is 0% and the single enum parameter carries no inline descriptions, so the description must compensate. It effectively does: every enum value is named and the ambiguous ones are clarified (restart = discard and record again, cancel = discard, finish = return the saved project).

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 names a specific resource (the active recording) and enumerates every action it accepts (pause, resume, addMarker, restart, cancel, finish), each with a parenthetical gloss. An agent can immediately distinguish it from siblings like record_start (begin) and record_state (query) without opening any schema.

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?

It gives explicit when-not-to guidance: pausing for short thinking is unnecessary because idle time is trimmed later. It stops short of routing the agent to siblings (e.g., record_start to begin, record_state to poll), so the alternative-selection story is implicit rather than spelled out.

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