list_windows

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, providing the safety profile. The description adds the exact return JSON structure and mentions filtering capabilities, which is useful context beyond annotations. No contradictions 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?

The description is a compact docstring with clear Args and Returns sections. The purpose statement is front-loaded and every sentence is informative, with no wasted words.

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 read-only listing tool, the description covers the return format and the available filtering options. With strong annotations and a well-defined output schema, it is sufficiently complete, though it doesn't mention edge cases like inaccessible windows or empty results.

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 outer 'params' parameter has no schema description (0% coverage), but the nested schema provides detailed descriptions for title_filter and include_empty_titles. The description merely says 'optional title filter and empty-title toggle' without repeating type/default info, so it adds only marginal value beyond the schema.

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 opens with 'List top-level windows with their titles, handles, positions and sizes.' This is a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like list_child_windows and list_headless_windows by the 'top-level' modifier.

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 usage context by emphasizing 'top-level windows' and listing the returned properties, which suggests it is for enumerating main desktop windows. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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