spyglass_get_block_states

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, which is transparent. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool is non-destructive or any other limitations, but the intent is clear.

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?

A single sentence that is concise, well-structured, and includes relevant examples without any fluff. Every word contributes to the purpose.

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?

Given no output schema, the description hints at the output (list of properties with default values) but does not specify the format. For a simple tool, this is adequate, and the context from sibling tools is clear.

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 already describes both parameters (100% coverage). The description adds value by providing concrete examples for block_id (e.g., 'oak_stairs') and property examples, thereby enhancing understanding beyond the schema.

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 specifies the action (Get), the resource (block state properties and default values), and provides examples (facing, waterlogged, power). It distinguishes from sibling tools like spyglass_get_commands or spyglass_get_registries by focusing on block states.

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 implicitly states when to use (when you need block state properties for a block ID) but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives among sibling tools. It lacks explicit usage context.

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