inspect_object

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It implies a read operation but does not explicitly state side effects, permissions, or limitations. Missing important context like whether inspection modifies state or requires specific access.

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, which is concise, but the term 'grip' is jargon that may not be immediately obvious. It could benefit from brief clarification or examples without adding length.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and incomplete parameter semantics, the description leaves significant gaps. It does not describe the return structure, error conditions, or the role of 'actor'. A more complete description is needed for effective tool selection.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must clarify meaning for all 3 parameters. It only hints at 'withInternalSlots' via 'optional internal slots', but 'grip' and 'actor' are left unexplained. The nested 'grip' object lacks any property definitions in the schema, adding confusion.

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 ('inspect') and identifies the resource as 'RDP object grip', listing the components included (preview, prototype, own properties, optional internal slots). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like analyze_target or get_dom_structure, which operate on different aspects.

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, nor any conditions or prerequisites. The description merely states what the tool does without contextual usage hints.

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