tag_window

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must convey behavioral traits. It describes the action (add/remove/toggle) and its effect on grouping, but does not disclose potential side effects, reversibility, or authority requirements. The description is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 two sentences plus a code example, all front-loaded with the core purpose. Every element earns its place without extraneous information.

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 simplicity of the tool (2 params, no output schema), the description sufficiently covers the functionality. It explains the tag syntax and integration with window rules, though it omits details on error cases or return values. Still complete for practical use.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds value by explaining the prefix syntax ('+', '-', none) with concrete examples and contextualizing the tag's use in window rules, which enhances understanding beyond the schema alone.

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?

Description clearly states 'Add, remove, or toggle a static tag on a window' with specific verb and resource. It explains the purpose of tags for grouping and window rules, distinguishing it from sibling tools that deal with other window operations.

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?

Description provides explicit syntax examples for adding, removing, and toggling tags, which guides usage. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool, the sibling set contains no similar tagging tools, so the guidance is clear for the intended domain.

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