Focus Space

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses a key behavioral trait: switching a space changes what the user sees, and unfocused-space tabs remain fully accessible. This adds meaningful context that the annotations do not capture. No contradiction with annotations found.

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?

Two compact sentences with no filler. The core action comes first, and the important behavioral caveat follows without unnecessary detail.

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 low-complexity, single-parameter action, the description plus schema covers the target, the source of valid identifiers, and a critical side-effect warning. The lack of output schema is not a material gap for a focus operation.

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 schema already fully documents the only parameter ('Space id or title from list_spaces'), so the description adds no new parameter information. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% schema description coverage.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Switch the front Arc window to a space.' This clearly differentiates focusing a space from tab-level operations like switch_to_tab or listing operations like list_spaces.

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?

It explicitly frames when the tool is appropriate ('rarely needed') and gives the underlying reason (tabs in unfocused spaces are still readable and scriptable). It does not name explicit alternatives or a hard when-not-to-use condition, but the guidance is clear and actionable.

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