switch_display

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action but doesn't explain whether the switch is persistent, what happens to the previously active display, whether permissions are needed, or how invalid indices are handled.

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 with no filler and the action verb front-loaded. It is appropriately short, though it could afford a brief clause about the parameter without becoming verbose.

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 single-parameter, annotation-free tool, the missing explanation of 'index' is a critical gap. The description conveys the overall purpose but not enough for an agent to determine what value to pass or how to obtain valid ones.

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 schema provides only a bare 'index' field with 0% description coverage, and the description never mentions the parameter. The agent is left without any indication of what index means (zero-based? from list_displays? valid range?), making it impossible to invoke correctly without external knowledge.

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 states a specific verb ('Switch') and resource ('active display'), and explicitly scopes the tool to 'screenshot and coordinate operations,' which distinguishes it from siblings like list_displays and cursor_position. The action and its domain are immediately clear.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention list_displays as the way to discover valid indices, nor does it describe scenarios that would warrant switching the display.

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