focus_explorer

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without mentioning side effects, preconditions, what happens if the explorer is hidden, or whether the view is opened or merely given focus. This is minimal behavioral transparency.

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 one short sentence with no filler or redundant detail. It clearly states the action and target while remaining appropriately concise for such a simple operation.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description states the core action sufficiently. However, it lacks any context about expected conditions or how it relates to the explorer-focused sibling tools, leaving minor but real ambiguity in tool selection.

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 has zero properties and the description does not need to document parameter meanings. With no parameters to explain, the baseline of 4 applies because there is nothing missing on the parameter front.

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 ('Focus') and target resource ('VSCode file explorer view'). Although 'focus' closely mirrors the tool name, it names the exact UI component, making the action reasonably clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like reveal_in_explorer or select_file_in_explorer.

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 no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools such as reveal_in_explorer and select_file_in_explorer exist, but no conditions, exclusions, or alternative routing are provided, so the agent must infer usage context.

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