ui_show_window

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It states the primary effect (open or focus) and target scope, but it does not clarify what happens when the window is already open, what focus=false does, or whether UI focus is stolen as a side effect.

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 concise sentence with the action verb front-loaded. It contains no filler, no repetition of the tool name, and no re-stating of schema 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?

For a simple UI show operation, the schema's enum and default values cover most invocation details and the description states the core action. However, it does not explain the 'plugin' window case, the effect of focus=false, or any return/failure behavior, leaving some practical gaps.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate for the parameters. It only hints at the name parameter via 'by name' and leaves the focus boolean unexplained, including when to set it to false. The 'plugin' enum value also remains ambiguous.

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 uses concrete verbs 'Open / focus' and names the resource as 'a main window by name,' which clearly distinguishes it from query tools like ui_focused_window and the complementary ui_hide_window. The scope is specific and matches the enum values in the schema.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or alternatives section, but 'by name' and 'main window' establish a clear invocation context. It does not mention exclusions or links to sibling tools like ui_hide_window, so the guidance is clear but not fully directive.

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