ui_find

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, openWorldHint), it adds valuable context: stable global element_index, pagination behavior (total/offset/limit/has_more), result ordering, and that no action tier is required. These details significantly enhance understanding without contradicting the 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 concise yet information-dense: four sentences cover the listing scope, item attributes, pagination, and usage. Each sentence provides unique value, with the main action front-loaded and no redundant filler.

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?

Without an output schema, the description explains the return structure (element_index, flags, pagination metadata) and how to consume results. It could be more explicit about requiring hwnd but implicitly states the tool operates on a window, so it is largely complete.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage for all 6 parameters with descriptions. The description adds general pagination context and the element_index usage but does not elaborate on individual parameters beyond the schema, meeting the baseline.

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 the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'interactive UI elements in a window' and includes ordering (buttons, fields, menus first; grid cells last). It clearly differentiates from siblings by stating that element_index is passed to ui_invoke/ui_set_value, distinguishing its role as a discovery tool.

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?

It provides clear context by stating it is read-only with no action tier required, and explains the output can be used with ui_invoke/ui_set_value. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare directly to get_ui_tree, leaving some room for ambiguity.

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