waveform_focus

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly states the action (foregrounding the main window) and its purpose, which is sufficient for a simple UI-focus operation. It does not mention failure conditions like Waveform not running, but that is a minor gap for this low-risk action.

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?

Two short sentences with no redundant wording: the first states the action, the second supplies the key prerequisite. Information is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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 parameterless UI-focus tool, the description covers purpose and prerequisite adequately. It doesn't state what happens if Waveform isn't running, but that can be inferred from sibling waveform_launch and is not essential for a foreground action.

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 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, so there is no parameter burden for the description. Baseline 4 is appropriate because there are no parameter semantics to explain.

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 uses a specific verb ('Bring') with a clear resource ('Waveform's main window') and a precise outcome ('to the foreground'). It also connects to sibling desktop_key/desktop_type, distinguishing it from focus-unrelated tools.

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 explicitly states when this tool is required—before desktop_key/desktop_type send keystrokes—which is strong usage guidance. It does not list alternatives or exclusions, but the prerequisite is stated directly.

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