window_resize

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states the core operation but omits important details such as coordinate system/origin, whether coordinates are absolute, behavior when multiple windows match appName, or what happens after the operation. This leaves meaningful behavioral ambiguity.

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, concise sentence with no filler. The verb and object are front-loaded, and every word contributes to the meaning.

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 tool with 5 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this one-line description is too thin. It does not explain coordinate semantics, how to reliably determine appName, or what success or failure looks like, leaving an agent under-informed for a call with many required inputs.

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%, with each parameter individually described, so the baseline is 3. The description adds little semantic value beyond labeling x/y as coordinates and width/height as dimensions; it does not explain units, origin, or coordinate conventions.

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 states a precise action ('move and resize') on a specific resource ('an application window') with explicit details ('coordinates and dimensions'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling window tools like window_focus, window_minimize, and window_close, which have distinct purposes.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as window_focus or window_close, nor any prerequisites like obtaining the appName via window_list. An agent is left to infer the appropriate context.

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