fmod_window_editorCurrent

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It only states 'returns' without disclosing side effects, permission needs, error conditions, or whether the result could be null. Minimal transparency.

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 very short but contains repetition of the same sentence and a truncated fragment ('e. [method · window.editorCurrent]'). This indicates lack of editing and conciseness.

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 simple getter with no params and no output schema, the description is somewhat complete. However, it lacks details about possible null results, what constitutes an 'active editor', and the type of ManagedObject returned.

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?

There are no parameters, so the description correctly implies no input is needed. Baseline is 4 for zero parameters, and the description adds no param info but also doesn't need to.

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 that the tool returns the currently selected ManagedObject in the last active editor, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like fmod_window_browserCurrent, though not explicitly. The repetition and trailing fragment slightly reduce clarity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as requiring an active editor or what happens if none is available.

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