ui_restore_window

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

Annotations only include openWorldHint:false, so the description carries the burden. It mentions 'via WindowPattern' but does not explain what this entails, any side effects, failure conditions, or required window state. Behavioral disclosure is minimal.

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, each earning its place: the first states the purpose, the second explains the parameter. No redundancy or unnecessary information.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the main aspects: purpose and parameter semantics. However, it lacks usage guidelines and behavioral transparency, leaving some gaps.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds critical meaning: it clarifies that window_title is a partial match and omitting it targets the main window. This goes beyond the schema's type definition.

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 action (restore a window to normal state) and the method (via WindowPattern). It also distinguishes from sibling tools like ui_minimize_window and ui_maximize_window by specifying the target state (normal).

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 when to use the tool (when a window is minimized or maximized) but does not provide explicit guidance on alternatives or prerequisites. It mentions an omission strategy for the parameter but lacks broader usage context.

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