strudel_get_state

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. 'Show' implies a non-mutating read and there are no parameters, so risk is minimal, but it never explicitly states side-effect freedom or anything about the freshness/latency of the reported state. It does add value by enumerating the returned content in place of a missing output schema.

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 front-loaded sentence that lists what is retrieved with no filler or redundancy. Every clause earns its place.

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?

With zero parameters and no output schema, the description does the necessary work by naming the returned fields (program, blocks, page count, address). It is close to complete; only the absence of explicit read-only confirmation and any sibling disambiguation keeps it short of full.

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 is an empty object with zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify. Baseline for a no-parameter tool is 4.

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 gives a specific verb ('Show') and names concrete resources: the Strudel program, its blocks, page count, and address. It clearly reads as a read/query tool, though it never distinguishes itself from the sibling 'tidal_get_state', which an agent could easily confuse it with.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites. With a sibling literally named 'tidal_get_state', the omission of any routing guidance is a real gap, leaving the agent to infer the choice from the tool name alone.

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