Bring a stage on screen

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core behavior (moving an off-screen window and focusing it) but does not mention side effects such as focus stealing, error behavior if the stage does not exist, or what the tool returns. For a simple one-parameter action, this is partially transparent but incomplete.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action and outcome immediately.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential action but omits return behavior and failure conditions. It is minimally complete but does not fully substitute for missing annotations or schema documentation.

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 coverage is 0%, so the single parameter 'stage_id' is undocumented in the schema. The description refers only to 'a stage window' and does not explain what stage_id represents, its expected format, or where to obtain it. The parameter name is somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds little.

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 action: moving a stage window from off-screen to the visible desktop and focusing it. This is clear and distinct from a generic 'open' action, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like stage_open or stage_state.

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 'from off-screen to the visible desktop' implies when this tool is appropriate, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives such as stage_open or stage_close. Usage is implied rather than prescribed.

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