show_window

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full burden. It states the main action but fails to disclose the default 'maximizar' (maximize) behavior implied by the parameter default true, nor does it mention side effects, limitations, or return values. This is a significant gap for a UI manipulation tool.

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: two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and then a brief context sentence. Every sentence earns its place with no unnecessary repetition or verbosity.

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 tool is simple, and the description covers its main purpose and context. However, it omits the behavior of the 'maximizar' parameter (default true), which is critical for correct invocation. The output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but the parameter gap leaves the description incomplete.

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 contains one parameter 'maximizar' with 0% description coverage, and the description does not mention it at all. Thus, the description adds no semantic value beyond the parameter name, failing to compensate for the schema's lack of documentation.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Trae la ventana de AutoCAD al frente' (brings the AutoCAD window to the front), using a specific verb and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools, which focus on drawing, entity manipulation, or file management.

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 a specific use case: 'Sirve cuando el servidor se engancho por COM sin que AutoCAD estuviera a la vista' (use when the server connected via COM without AutoCAD being visible). This gives clear context, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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