start_record

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

With no annotations, the description bears the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only states that it starts recording and where files land, but fails to mention what happens if recording is already active (e.g., whether it errors, restarts, or is a no-op), any permissions required, or other side effects. This is a minimal disclosure that leaves important behavioral traits undisclosed.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the action ('Start recording to disk') and immediately adds a useful pointer to where files land. Every word earns its place; there is no unnecessary padding or repetition.

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 zero-parameter, simple command with no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It explains the core action and the file destination, which are the most critical facts. However, it omits behavioral details like handling of an already-active recording, which could be relevant in context. Given the simplicity, this is a reasonable but not exhaustive description.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter semantics. Per the rubric, 0 params yields a baseline of 4. The description adds no parameter-related info, but none is needed.

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 clearly states the action ('Start recording') and the resource ('to disk'), using a specific verb that distinguishes it from sibling tools like toggle_record, stop_record, and pause_record. The reference to config_tools.get/set_record_directory also reinforces the disk-related purpose. This is a clear and differentiated purpose statement.

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 that this tool is used when the agent wants to begin recording to disk, which is a clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare it to alternatives such as toggle_record, which could lead to confusion about whether to use start_record or toggle_record. The guidance is inferred rather than stated.

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