Fullscreen/maximize toggle

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that it toggles fullscreen/maximized and uses the focused window by default, but it leaves ambiguity about whether 'toggle' means switching between states or setting a specific mode, and it doesn't state behavior when no window is focused or how address/match interact. Partial disclosure.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes only the essential targeting info. No wasted words, perfectly structured for quick comprehension.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is markedly incomplete. It omits critical details like the exact semantics of address vs match, what happens if no window is focused or found, and whether the mode sets or toggles state. These gaps make it hard for an agent to call correctly in edge cases.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the mode parameter ('fullscreen (real) or maximized (fake)') and that address/match are for explicit targeting, but it doesn't define their formats, precedence, or difference. This is a partial compensation but leaves the agent guessing on key parameter details.

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 action ('Toggle') and the resource ('fullscreen/maximized') with a helpful qualifier ('real vs fake'). It also explains default targeting ('Defaults to the focused window') and an alternative explicit target. This distinguishes it from sibling window tools like window_snap or window_resize, making the purpose immediately clear.

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 clear usage context: defaults to focused window and that address/match can target a specific window. However, it doesn't mention when not to use this tool or name an alternative among the many window-related siblings, so it stops short of explicit routing guidance.

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