Bring app window to front

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It does disclose two behaviors—bringing the window into view and un-minimizing—which is useful. However, it does not describe failure behavior when the app is not running or when no matching window exists, leaving a nontrivial behavioral gap for an unannotated 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 sentence with no wasted words. The main action is front-loaded and the useful un-minimize qualifier is efficiently tucked into a parenthetical.

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 two-parameter tool, the description plus the detailed schema covers the basic call, but the lack of any pointer to sibling tools—especially open_app and focus_folder_window—and the unstated precondition that the app is already running leave the context slightly incomplete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description itself adds no parameter-level detail. The pid parameter is already well documented in the schema, including the guidance to omit it first and retry with a PID when multiple matches occur.

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 uses a specific verb ('Show and switch focus') plus a clear resource ('an app's window'), and adds a useful behavioral qualifier: un-minimizes it if needed. It differentiates from the sibling focus_folder_window because the target is explicitly an app window rather than a folder window.

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 intended use is implied by the verb 'focus' and the target 'app window', but the description never says when not to use it, that the app must already be running, or that open_app or focus_folder_window should be chosen for launching apps or focusing folder windows. No explicit alternatives or exclusions are given.

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