get_frontmost_app

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It indicates the tool is a read-only operation via the verb 'Get' and adds scoping (currently active/frontmost). However, it does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, what information is returned, or any edge cases. This is adequate for a simple getter 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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. No unnecessary words or filler. It earns its place perfectly.

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 the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is mostly complete. It defines what the tool does and its target (frontmost app). It falls slightly short of 5 because it doesn't mention any possible return values or error conditions, but the output schema likely covers the return shape.

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 zero parameters, so the description has no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and no additional parameter documentation is needed.

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 function: retrieving information about the currently active (frontmost) application. The verb 'Get' is specific, the resource is well-defined, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_running_apps and is_app_running by focusing on the frontmost app.

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 usage for obtaining info about the active app but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it vs. alternatives (e.g., list_running_apps). The context is self-evident from the name and description, but there is no mention of exclusions or alternatives.

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