list_windows

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful context beyond annotations by enumerating the exact window properties returned (Z-order, focus, etc.), which is valuable for the agent. It does not contradict annotations.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose ('List open desktop windows') and provides specific detail. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 zero-parameter, read-only tool, the description is complete. It explains both the action and the return content (title, process, state, position, Z-order, focus), which is especially important given there is no output schema. No critical gaps are apparent.

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 zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline for parameter semantics is 4. The description adds no parameter info because none exist, which 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 tool lists open desktop windows with a specific set of attributes (title, process, minimized/maximized state, position, Z-order, focus). It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on windows (not processes) and by noting it replaces screenshots for 'what is open'.

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 phrase 'Replaces screenshots for "what is open"' provides clear context for when to use this tool: when an agent needs to know what windows are open on the desktop. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, so it misses the highest bar.

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