window_dock

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

With no annotations, the description details behaviors: pin survival over minimize, dock failure on elevated processes, and override of Win+Arrow snap. It covers major caveats but could mention OS version dependencies.

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?

Well-organized with Purpose, Details, Prefer, Caveats, Examples. Each section is concise and informative, avoiding repetition. The structure makes it easy to scan.

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?

Covers prerequisites and edge cases but lacks output schema or return value description. Examples show call syntax but not results, leaving the agent to infer response behavior.

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 100%, but the description adds value via defaults (480x360, bottom-right corner) and examples. The 'include' parameter is generic and could be omitted, but overall it aids understanding.

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 it decorates windows with three distinct actions (pin, unpin, dock). It provides specific verb-resource pairs and differentiates from sibling tools like focus_window by focusing on always-on-top and positioning.

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 'Prefer' section gives explicit guidance on when to use dock versus pin alone, offering decision context. However, it does not mention when to use alternatives like focus_window, slightly limiting completeness.

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