desktop_observe

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

The description adds a useful behavioral detail beyond the annotations: 'a window screenshot focuses that window,' which is a potential side effect. With readOnlyHint=false, this is meaningful context. However, it does not disclose whether observing controls has other side effects, what diff does, or what the output looks like, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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 extremely concise, with two front-loaded sentences and no filler. It earns its space by stating the core behavior and a key side effect. It could be slightly longer to cover parameters, but as written it is efficiently structured.

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?

With 4 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is too sparse to fully prepare an agent for correct invocation. It lacks explanations for diff, screenshot, and max_elements, and does not clarify how this tool relates to desktop_status. Significant gaps remain.

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. It partially explains the window parameter by noting that omitting it captures the full desktop. But it says nothing about diff, screenshot, or max_elements, all of which are undocumented in both the schema and description.

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 a specific action ('Observe controls and screenshot together') and the resource being acted on. It also distinguishes between window and full-desktop modes, which gives concrete scope. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like desktop_status, so the differentiation is not fully explicit.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus desktop_status, desktop_exec, desktop_cancel, or desktop_reset. It only gives parameter-level guidance ('Omit window for the full desktop'), which helps with invocation but not tool selection.

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