screenstudio_record_start

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-open-world write, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds that audio and camera default off and that area is measured in display points, but says nothing about what artifact is produced, where it is stored, or how the recording is stopped (record_control).

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?

Three tight sentences with the primary action front-loaded and no filler. The mode/scope detail leads, followed by defaults and workflow, which is a sensible ordering.

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?

For a mutation tool with 7 parameters at 0% schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the recording modes and defaults but omits how a session is stopped, where output lands, and the meaning of several parameters. Adequate but with visible gaps.

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% across 7 parameters, so the description must compensate. It partially does by clarifying area semantics ('area in display points') and the three recording targets, but name, systemAudio, and the device IDs (cameraDeviceId, microphoneDeviceId) are left undocumented beyond the audio/camera-off default.

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?

States a specific verb ('Start recording') and enumerates the exact target resources (one exact window, a display, or an area of a display), which lets an agent map it to windowId/displayId/area without opening the schema. It reads distinctly from sibling recording tools like screenstudio_record_control and screenstudio_record_state.

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?

Offers workflow guidance ('Rehearse first; record each beat with screenstudio_desktop_perform') and routes the agent to a specific sibling, but never states when to use this versus record_control or record_state, nor any preconditions like app/editor state. Usage is implied rather than explicit.

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