activate_window

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

No annotations given, so description carries full burden. It describes the action but omits details like whether it works on minimized windows, error conditions, or permission requirements. Adequate for basic understanding.

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?

Very concise, with action stated first then Args breakdown. No wasted words; every sentence serves a purpose.

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 simple tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the main action and prerequisite. However, it could mention what happens on success/failure or any return value, though output schema may handle that.

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 0% and there is one parameter. The description adds minimal context ('The window ID to activate') but doesn't explain format or how to obtain it beyond referencing 'windows()'. Baseline for 0 params would be 4, but with one param and low coverage, 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('bring a window to the foreground') and specifies the resource (window). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'windows' (listing) and 'focus' (likely on elements).

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?

Provides a clear prerequisite: 'Use windows() to find the window ID first,' linking to a sibling tool. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but for a simple tool this is sufficient.

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