niri_get_focused

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the burden. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation with no side effects, but the description does not explicitly state safety or behavior details. As a getter, the risk is low, but richer context (e.g., 'does not mutate state') would improve transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to the meaning, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

With no parameters and an output schema present, the description need not explain return values. It covers both aspects (focused window and monitor) and is adequate for a simple getter, though it does not mention edge cases like no focused window.

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 and schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter details but none are needed; it clearly defines what is being queried, which is sufficient.

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 gets detailed information about the focused window and display monitor, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like niri_get_windows (all windows) and niri_get_outputs (all outputs).

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 when focused window/monitor info is needed but does not explicitly discuss alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusion criteria are provided, but the focused scope is clear from the text.

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