List Windows

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description aligns with these by describing a listing operation with no side effects. It adds context about the return value being used for screenshots, which does not contradict the annotations. No contradictions present.

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 and to the point. It conveys the core functionality and a usage tip in two short sentences, with no unnecessary fluff. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Given that there is no output schema, the description does not need to explain exact return types. However, it does hint at the return content ('returned address'), which is useful context. It is complete enough for typical usage, but could benefit from a note about the format of the window data (e.g., if it returns a list of objects with addresses and titles). Otherwise, it adequately covers the tool's purpose.

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?

There is only one parameter, 'workspace', and its description ('Filter to a specific workspace ID or name') is clear and complete. The parameter's purpose and expected format are explicitly stated, providing full semantic 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 clearly states the tool's function: 'List all visible windows on the Hyprland desktop via hyprctl.' This is a specific verb (list) and resource (windows), and it distinguishes from sibling tools by the fact that siblings are screenshot and analysis tools, while this one is for listing window information.

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 provides a clear usage hint: 'Use the returned address with screenshot_window, or use "focused" to target the active window.' This implies when to use the tool (before taking screenshots) and highlights a parameter-specific behavior. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternative scenarios, so it is not fully explicit.

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