select_window

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

The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the annotations. It states that the window becomes active, which implies a state change, but it does not disclose potential side effects, required context (e.g., session), or return behavior. With readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false, the description should elaborate but does not.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with zero waste. It directly communicates the core action and result, earning the highest score for conciseness.

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 tool with one parameter and no schema descriptions, the description is too minimal to be actionable. It fails to specify how to fill the 'target' parameter or what the tool returns, despite an output schema existing. The description does not adequately cover the tool's usage complexity.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate for the 'target' parameter. It only repeats 'target window' without explaining the expected format (e.g., window index, name, or session:window syntax), leaving the agent guessing.

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 tool's purpose: selecting a target window to make it active. It uses a specific verb ('select') and resource ('target window'), and the outcome ('become active') distinguishes it from related tools like select_pane.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as select_pane or send_keys. The description implies usage based on its purpose, but there is no explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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