Switch to a specified document tab in EasyEDA Pro and place input focus on it. Use this to activate a particular document by providing its tab ID.
dmt_EditorControl.activateDocument(tabId: string) -> Promise 激活文档 remarks: 切换到指定文档的标签页，并将输入焦点置于其中 returns: 操作是否成功
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| args | No | 按官方签名顺序排列的JSON参数数组 | |
| windowId | No | 目标EDA窗口ID；省略时使用当前活动窗口 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core behavior (tab switch + focus) and the boolean success return, but doesn't mention failure cases, prerequisites (e.g., tabId must exist), or confirm there are no content-modifying side effects.
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 compact and organized into signature, Chinese summary, remarks, and returns, with no filler. The '激活文档' summary line is slightly redundant with the remarks, but overall the structure is 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?
Given a simple one-argument operation and high schema coverage, the description is mostly adequate. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it does not explain what happens on invalid tabId, how to obtain a valid tabId, or how this tool relates to the many sibling editor_control tools.
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 coverage is 100% and windowId is already described in the schema. The description adds value beyond the schema by exposing the exact signature `tabId: string` and tying tabId to the 'specified document' in the remarks, which helps an agent construct the args array.
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 identifies a specific action—'activate document' / 'switch to the tab of the specified document and put input focus in it'—with a clear resource (document tab) and a tabId parameter. It does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling open/close/split-screen tools, so it falls short of a 5.
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 remark 'switch to the tab of the specified document' implies the document is already open and the tool is for activating an existing tab, not opening one. There is no explicit when/when-not guidance or mention of alternatives such as open_document, so usage is only implied.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.