activate_document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral load. It discloses matching against title, full path, or file name, case-insensitive comparison, the underlying ActivateDoc3 call, and a read-back verification step, but omits failure modes such as no match or multiple matches.

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?

Two well-structured sentences with the purpose front-loaded. The implementation detail in the second sentence directly supports correct invocation and no words are wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. The description covers matching and confirmation but does not describe error behavior when no document matches or multiple documents match. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds case-insensitive matching and the accepted identifier forms, going slightly beyond the schema's 'Window title, full path, or bare file name'.

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?

States a specific verb 'Switch' plus resource 'open document' and target state 'active one', which distinguishes it from siblings like open_model, load_part, or list_open_documents. An agent can tell what the tool does without opening the schema.

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 when-to-use guidance, no alternatives named (e.g., list_open_documents or open_model), and no prerequisites. The description explains the mechanism but not the selection context versus sibling tools.

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