fx_show_ui

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly states the UI-display action and documents the -1 master-track convention, but it does not disclose whether the operation is non-destructive, whether an FX must already exist, or what happens for invalid indexes. Core behavior is present, but side effects and failure behavior are not addressed.

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 one clear purpose sentence plus two concise argument bullets. It is front-loaded, contains no filler, and every sentence contributes useful information.

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 two-parameter UI-opening tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies the key invocation details: indexing and the master-track sentinel. It lacks explicit when-to-use guidance and a statement about return/void behavior, but these are minor gaps given the simplicity of the tool.

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%, so the description must compensate, and it does fully: track_index is explained as 0-based with -1 for the master track, and fx_index is explained as a 0-based FX chain index. This adds real meaning beyond the bare integer schema fields.

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 'Open FX plugin UI window' states a specific action and resource. Among the many fx_* sibling tools, showing the UI window is a distinct operation, so an agent can distinguish it without needing additional context.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use fx_show_ui instead of related fx_* tools such as fx_enable, fx_disable, fx_get_params, or fx_navigate_preset. No alternatives, preconditions, or exclusions are mentioned, so the agent must infer usage solely from the name.

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