System Get Focus Status

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds no behavioral context beyond that. It does not contradict the annotations, but it provides no information about what reading focus status entails or what side effects (if any) could exist.

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 brevity here is under-specification, not conciseness. The sentence spends its words on 'Delegated' and 'exposed through' rather than on the tool's actual purpose, so it does not earn its place.

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?

With zero parameters, read-only annotations, and an output schema, the tool is low complexity, but the description still fails to state what the tool returns or what 'focus status' means. An agent can infer the topic from the name, but the description itself is not complete enough to support confident invocation.

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 tool has no parameters, so the description is not required to explain parameter semantics. This is the appropriate baseline for a zero-parameter tool.

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 only restates the tool name and packaging ('Delegated Apple domain tool... exposed through Apple-Tools-MCP') without stating what the tool actually does. It never explains that it retrieves the current Focus status, so it reads as a tautology rather than a functional description.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool or when to prefer alternatives. Notably, sibling tools include apple_get_focus_status, system_status, and system_get_frontmost_app, yet the description does not differentiate this tool from them.

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