open-staedel-explorer

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It says 'Open the interactive...app' but does not explain what this means in practice—e.g., does it launch a browser, return a URL, or require specific permissions? The effect of the optional parameters on behavior is also omitted.

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 a single sentence of 14 words that is concise and front-loaded with the action and purpose. Every word contributes meaning; there is no fluff.

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 that an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values. However, the tool is simple (open an app) but lacks details about what the output actually is (e.g., a URL, a redirect). The description is complete for a basic understanding but leaves some ambiguity about the interaction model.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning to the parameters beyond what is already in the schema (set and from). No further elaboration is provided.

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 uses a specific verb ('Open') and resource ('the interactive Städel Explorer app'), and clearly indicates the tool's purpose is for visual browsing and filtering. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that list sets, get single objects, or search objects.

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 implies the tool is used when a visual interface is desired ('for browsing and filtering objects visually'), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search-museum-objects' or provide any exclusions or prerequisites.

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