expand_element

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

The idempotentHint annotation already indicates the tool is safe to retry. The description adds modest behavioral context by referencing the UIA ExpandCollapse pattern, but does not discuss edge cases (e.g., expanding an already expanded element) or side effects. With annotations present, the description is adequate but not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence with no superfluous words. Every word earns its place.

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 simple one-parameter action tool, the description is mostly complete. It lacks an explanation of the return value (since no output schema exists), but the usage is intuitive. The annotation provides idempotency context. Minor gaps reduce the score from 5 to 4.

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 100% with a clear description for elementId. The description does not add any parameter information beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('expand') and resource ('collapsible element') with examples (tree node, combo box, menu) and mentions the UIA pattern. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like collapse_element, toggle_element, and click_element.

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 provides clear context by stating it expands collapsible elements via the UIA ExpandCollapse pattern. It implicitly tells the agent when to use this tool, but does not explicitly exclude alternatives like collapse_element or toggle_element.

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