window_focus

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the core behavior (focus and activate) but does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., focus stealing), error conditions (e.g., invalid window_id), or required permissions. Adequate but not thorough.

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 sentence of 14 words, front-loading the action. Every word is necessary; no redundancy or extraneous 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 no annotations, no output schema, and a rich sibling ecosystem, the description is too minimal. It lacks prerequisites, error handling, or behavioral nuances expected for a focus-changing tool. Should provide more context for safe agent usage.

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. Per calibration, baseline is 4. The description adds context by stating that the window_id comes from list_windows, which is meaningful beyond the empty schema.

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 (brings to front, activates) and the resource (window), referencing the source of window_id from list_windows. This is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like window_set_frame.

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 implies that window_id comes from list_windows, hinting at appropriate usage, but lacks explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternatives. It provides minimal guidance for an agent to decide between this and other window tools.

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