computer.inspect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses one useful trait (default not returning the full UI tree) but omits critical details such as read-only status, mode semantics (auto/uia/ocr/vision), query behavior, and return format. This leaves significant gaps for a query tool.

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 single, tightly written sentence that front-loads the main action and adds a useful default-behavior note. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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?

Given no output schema, no annotations, and a nested query object with many undocumented fields, the description is too sparse. It omits essential details like mode meanings, query semantics, and expected return structure, leaving the agent under-informed for correct usage.

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 coverage is 67% for top-level parameters, with descriptions for mode and window, but the nested query object's fields are entirely undocumented. The description adds minimal parameter meaning, failing to explain the enum values or the purpose of query sub-properties like role, text, or automationId.

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 the tool queries windows or semantic UI elements on demand, using a specific verb and resource. The phrase 'default does not return the full UI tree' implies a distinction from a full-dump tool, but it does not explicitly name sibling tools for differentiation.

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: on-demand querying and a default that avoids full UI tree output, suggesting it is for targeted inspection. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use guidance or comparisons with alternatives like computer.screenshot or computer.state.

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