window_capture_ocr

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

The description discloses a key behavioral trait: it does NOT focus the window, which is a significant side-effect avoidance. It also explains the default ocr behavior. With no annotations provided, this is valuable behavioral context.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the most important behavior (no focus), and the ocr default is explained inline. Zero waste.

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 tool has an output schema, so return values are covered. The description explains the core behavior and default. It could mention what happens when ocr=0, but the output schema likely covers that. Overall adequate for a 2-param tool.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the ocr parameter's default and effect (returns text directly), but doesn't explain hwnd beyond the schema's integer type. The description adds some meaning but not full parameter coverage.

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 tool captures a background window without focusing it, and with ocr=1 (default) returns its text directly. This distinguishes it from siblings like screenshot, ocr_screen, and focus_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 description implies when to use it: when you need to read another app's content without disrupting the user's work. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough.

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