show_hide_window

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It transparently discloses the cycle sequence (full → mini tornado → hidden → full). However, it does not mention potential side effects like focus changes or platform compatibility, but for a simple toggle this is adequate.

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 sentence that front-loads the action ('Cycle') and concisely specifies the states and order. 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?

For a zero-parameter tool with simple behavior, the description is nearly complete. It explains the states and cycle order. It lacks mention of initial state or prerequisites (e.g., window must exist), but these are minor omissions given the tool's simplicity.

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 input schema has no parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (trivial). The description does not need to add parameter meaning because there are none. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 cycles a specific window through three distinct states (full, mini tornado, hidden) in a defined order. It uses a specific verb 'cycle' and resource 'Windy Word window', distinguishing it from sibling tools that perform single-state actions like minimize_window or maximize_window.

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 for cycling through window states but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., individual state commands). It lacks when-not-to-use or prerequisite context.

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