apply_saved_layout

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: opens not-running apps, waits for windows, moves them into saved positions, explains macOS jumping behavior, returns per-app success, reports apps that never opened a window, and mentions a minute-long wait.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then legacy guidance, then behavioral specifics. Each sentence contributes meaningful detail without redundancy, making the description dense but 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-parameter schema, no output schema, and no annotations, this description covers the operation, behavioral quirks, return value, and performance characteristics. It is fully comprehensive for the tool's complexity.

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 schema has one string parameter 'name' with 0% description coverage. The description clarifies that 'name' is the saved workspace name, adding meaning beyond the raw type. While minimal, it adequately compensates for the single parameter.

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 opens with 'Launch a saved workspace by name,' a specific verb and resource. It immediately differentiates from the sibling launch_workspace by noting this is a legacy name and pointing to the newer tool.

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?

Explicitly states when to use this tool ('Legacy name kept for older clients') and directs new integrations to launch_workspace, which adds a 'screen' option. Also notes the time cost for large workspaces.

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