catia_list_windows

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a behavioral detail—that the tool maps each window to its document—which goes beyond the annotations. It does not overload with unnecessary side effects, and nothing contradicts the annotations.

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?

A single concise sentence directly states the tool's function with no filler or repetition. It front-loads the verb and resource, making the purpose immediately accessible. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description fully captures the behavior: it lists open windows and their associated documents. Annotations cover safety, and the description provides all necessary information for an agent to decide when and how to call it without ambiguity.

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 the schema confirms this with an empty properties object. The description correctly omits parameter details since there are none. With 100% schema coverage and no parameters, the baseline of 4 applies—there is nothing for the description to add.

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 a specific verb ('List') and resource ('CATIA's open windows') and clarifies the purpose: listing windows and the document each displays. It clearly distinguishes from similar tools like catia_list_documents by focusing on windows rather than documents alone, making its intent unambiguous.

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 purpose is clear enough that an agent can infer when to call this tool (to inspect the window-to-document mapping). However, the description does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives such as catia_list_documents or catia_activate_document, nor does it state conditions for when not to use it. The guidance is implied but not explicit.

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