tool_list_windows

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states the tool is read-only and safe while the user works, and it discloses the sorting behavior and scope ('visible top-level windows'). This goes beyond the schema and gives an agent confidence about side effects.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then packs in the key output fields and ordering. Every clause earns its place with no filler or redundancy.

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?

The output schema exists, so return values are presumably covered elsewhere. The description covers purpose, scope, sorting, and safety, but it omits filter_title semantics and does not provide guidance on when to prefer this over sibling tools. For a simple list tool this is acceptable but not fully complete.

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 only parameter, filter_title, is not mentioned in the description. Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description should explain what filtering means (e.g., substring match, case sensitivity), but it does not. The parameter name and default empty string imply optionality, but no semantic detail is provided.

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 ('List'), a precise resource ('all visible top-level windows'), and the exact fields returned (title, hwnd, PID, position, size). It also mentions sorting behavior, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like tool_find_window or tool_get_window_rect.

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 when to use the tool: when you need an overview of visible top-level windows. It also notes the operation is read-only and safe while the user works, which is useful context. However, it does not explicitly contrast this tool with alternatives or state when not to use it.

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