winGetPos

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful runtime context (trusted owner, interactive desktop), but does not explain return values, error behavior, or other operational traits.

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 definition is short, but its first sentence is a redundant restatement of the name and does not earn its place. The second sentence carries all the useful content, leaving the overall structure under-specified rather than concise.

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 read-only getter with no output schema, the description should clarify what is returned (e.g., window coordinates or handle) and how it relates to sibling position tools like mouseGetPos or controlGetPos. It provides only environment prerequisites and omits this essential context.

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 100%, so both the required window title and optional window text parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond that, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 mostly restates the tool name ("Windows AutoIt winGetPos") without stating the action or resource explicitly. It does not say that it retrieves a window's position or how that differs from sibling getters like winGetTitle or winGetHandle.

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?

It gives a prerequisite — a trusted owner and an interactive Windows x64 desktop — but no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives or when it should not be used. Conditions for selection versus siblings are entirely absent.

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