herdr_agent_focus

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is partly covered. However, the description adds nothing beyond them: it doesn't say what 'focusing' changes (which pane becomes active, whether existing focus is stolen, what happens if the target is dead), which matters for a non-idempotent, non-read-only operation.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and free of filler, which is good, but at four words it is under-specified rather than truly concise. There is no wasted text, yet nothing is earned by the brevity either.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description plus schema is barely sufficient to call it. It omits any note on the mutating, non-idempotent side effect and any return/confirmation behavior, which an agent would benefit from knowing.

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% and the single 'target' parameter already documents 'Live agent name or pane id.' The description adds no additional meaning (e.g., how ambiguity between a name and a pane id is resolved), so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a verb and a resource ('Focus an agent's pane'), which is better than a tautology, but 'focus' is ambiguous (UI focus vs. agent activation) and it does nothing to distinguish itself from siblings like herdr_pane_zoom or herdr_agent_get. An agent can guess the intent but cannot confidently route between near-neighbors.

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?

There is no indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as herdr_pane_zoom or herdr_agent_get, nor any prerequisite or state condition. The agent is left to infer usage entirely from the name.

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