ui_focused_plugin

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does convey the core behavior—returning the name/caption of the currently focused plugin editor—but it does not cover edge cases such as what happens when no plugin editor has focus. For a zero-parameter read tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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 compact sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to defining the output and the focus condition, making it highly efficient.

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 getter with no output schema, the description supplies the essential return contract: the name/caption of the focused plugin editor window. It does not specify fallback behavior when no plugin editor is focused, but no additional information is required to invoke the tool correctly.

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 tool has no parameters and the schema is an empty object, so the baseline of 4 applies. There is no parameter information for the description to add beyond what the empty schema already conveys.

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 states that the tool returns the name/caption of the plugin editor window that currently has focus, which clearly identifies the resource and focus condition. It is distinguishable from siblings like ui_focused_window and plugin_name, but it lacks an explicit verb such as 'gets' or 'returns.'

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ui_focused_window or plugin_name. It implies a focused plugin editor context but does not state exclusions or direct the agent toward a sibling tool.

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