list_windows

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the burden of explaining side effects and filtering. It clearly states the tool lists only visible top-level windows (no hidden or child windows), and the word 'List' implies a non-mutating read operation. It does not mention ordering or enumeration caveats, but these are minor for a zero-parameter read 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?

A single sentence conveys the action, scope, and output fields with no filler. The key scoping terms ('visible', 'top-level') appear up front.

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?

Given that no parameters are required and an output schema exists, the description supplies the essential identifying fields and the central filter. An agent can call this tool correctly without needing additional context.

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?

There are zero parameters, so there is nothing to document beyond the schema's empty properties object. The description adds value by specifying what the returned rows contain (hwnd, title, process name, pid), which the schema cannot show.

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 opens with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('visible top-level windows'), then enumerates the exact fields returned. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like window_children by narrowing scope to top-level windows and from screenshot by being an enumeration rather than a capture.

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?

No guidance is given for when to use this tool instead of related window tools such as window_children, focus_window, or close_window. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative references, leaving the agent to infer the intended use case.

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