niri_get_windows

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'List' clearly signals a read-only operation, and the description specifies exactly what data is returned. For a simple getter with an output schema, this is adequate transparency; it could be improved by stating that it returns all workspaces' windows with no filtering.

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 that efficiently conveys the action, scope, and returned fields. No wasted words or redundancy.

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?

A zero-parameter, read-only list tool with an output schema. The description enumerates the returned fields and clarifies it covers all windows. There are no side effects or parameters to describe, and the sibling context makes the tool's role clear. The description is complete.

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 input schema is fully covered by default. Per the baseline for 0-parameter tools, the description does not need to add parameter details. The description 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 uses the specific verb 'List' and identifies the exact resource ('all open windows in Niri DE') and enumerates returned fields (titles, app IDs, window IDs, workspace IDs, focus status). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like niri_get_workspaces or niri_get_focused.

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 a full list of windows is needed) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion cases. It does not say 'for focused window use niri_get_focused' or similar, leaving some ambiguity relative to sibling getter tools.

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