mask_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds useful behavioral context by stating that the tool reports whether a mask is present ('if any') and whether it is enabled/inverted, going beyond the annotations.

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?

A single, compact sentence that packs in the key facts: the resource (window), the queried attribute (attached mask), and the specific details (enabled/inverted). There is no redundant or filler content.

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 one-parameter read-only query, the description covers the return concept reasonably well even without an output schema. However, it omits explicit parameter semantics and any usage context, leaving minor but real gaps for an agent deciding whether and how to call it.

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, id, with no schema description and 0% schema_description_coverage. The description implies that id refers to a window because it says 'attached to a window', but it does not explicitly state that id is the window identifier. This is inferable but not fully explicit.

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 identifies what is reported: which mask is attached to a window and its enabled/inverted state. It lacks an explicit imperative verb such as 'get' or 'list', but the query phrasing makes the purpose unambiguous and distinguishes it from mask-creation or mask-application siblings like apply_mask and star_mask.

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?

There is no guidance about when to call this tool instead of related mask tools such as apply_mask, star_mask, or range_mask. The description states what it reports but not the situations in which an agent should prefer it, nor any exclusions or alternatives.

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