hide_headless_desktop

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

Annotations indicate it modifies state but is not destructive. The description adds that it restores the normal desktop, and specifies the return format. This adds context beyond annotations, though it doesn't detail side effects or prerequisites.

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 extremely concise: a single clear sentence for purpose, followed by structured Args and Returns sections. Every sentence is necessary, and the main action is front-loaded.

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 description provides the essential information: what it does, when to use it, the parameter, and the return value. It lacks explicit information on error cases or preconditions, but for a simple paired tool this is sufficient.

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 already describes the 'name' parameter as 'Name of the off-screen desktop'. The description adds 'for symmetry' which is a small extra context, but not significant enough to raise the score above baseline given the lone parameter and schema 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 explicitly states the action ('switch the live screen back to the normal desktop'), the resource ('live screen'), and the context ('after show_headless_desktop'). It clearly differentiates from the sibling tool show_headless_desktop.

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 gives clear context by stating 'after show_headless_desktop', implying when to use it. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives, but the pairing is strongly implied.

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