hyprland_dispatch

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully explains the tool's behavior: it executes a Lua expression via hyprctl dispatch, warns about the version change, and clarifies the two input modes. No contradictions with 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?

The description is relatively long but each sentence serves a purpose given the complexity. It is front-loaded with the tool's purpose, but could be slightly more concise without losing critical details.

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 the tool's complexity (escape hatch, breaking version change, two modes), and the lack of output schema and annotations, the description is thorough. It covers the version update, input modes, parameter relationships, and points to external references.

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 100% description coverage, but the description adds significant value by explaining how path and args work together to build the call, and when to use raw_expression with examples. This goes beyond the schema's type definitions.

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 it is an 'escape hatch' for running any Hyprland dispatcher not covered by a dedicated tool, distinguishing itself from sibling tools that focus on specific dispatchers. It explains the breaking change in Hyprland 0.55 and the two modes of invocation.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool (when no dedicated tool exists) and provides detailed guidance on how to use it: either via path+args for standard dispatchers or raw_expression for unusual ones. It also directs users to external documentation for further help.

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