kitty_resize_os_window

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions the restriction on certain window managers but does not disclose side effects, permissions, or whether actions are reversible. Adequate but with gaps.

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 that are concise and front-loaded. The first sentence lists actions and target, the second adds a crucial caveat. No unnecessary words.

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?

The description covers the main purpose and a limitation, but given the complexity (7 parameters, no output schema), it could add more context like how 'match' works or differentiate from kitty_resize_window. It is minimally adequate.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add parameter details. It does not provide additional semantics beyond the schema, achieving the baseline score.

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's actions (resize, show, hide, toggle fullscreen/maximized) and the target (kitty OS windows). It distinguishes from siblings like kitty_resize_window by specifying 'OS windows'.

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 note about window managers not allowing resizing provides important context for when the tool may not work. However, it doesn't explicitly compare with sibling tools or specify when to use this over others like kitty_resize_window.

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