sassy_screen_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It clearly signals a read-only operation via 'Get' and enumerates the returned data (resolution, position, DPI scaling, primary), which is sufficient behavioral disclosure for a simple info query. It does not discuss permissions or failure cases, but those are less material here.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by a practical use case. No filler or redundancy; every sentence 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 simple zero-parameter read-only info tool with an output schema present, the description is fully adequate: it names all relevant data categories returned and the intended scenario. It leaves no major gaps in what an agent needs to know to invoke it.

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 baseline for 0 params is 4. The description adds value by specifying what display attributes are returned, compensating for there being no schema semantics to clarify.

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 a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'display configuration', enumerating exact data returned: monitors with resolution, position, DPI scaling, and primary status. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like sassy_desktop_state, so it falls just 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?

'Essential for multi-monitor setups' provides an explicit use case, and the read-only nature implies when to choose it over mutating tools. It does not name alternative display-related tools or state exclusions, so not a 5.

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