Retrieve the current LIRA modal dialog's title, text, and buttons to resolve timed-out calls or analyses waiting in the needs_user state.
Modal dialogs LIRA shows now: title, text and buttons. A call that timed out or an analysis with status needs_user usually waits for one of them.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes safety. The description adds useful behavioral context by explaining that these dialogs are current transient UI state and when they typically appear, though it does not elaborate further on interaction flow.
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 short sentences with no waste: the first defines the return content, and the second provides immediate usage context. The purpose is front-loaded.
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 no parameters, an output schema, and a readOnly annotation, the description is nearly complete. It could more explicitly connect the returned buttons to lira_press_dialog_button, but the essential context is present.
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 tool has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are inherently complete. Baseline score of 4 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 states that the tool returns currently shown modal dialogs and enumerates their fields: title, text, and buttons. This is clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like lira_press_dialog_button, though the description does not explicitly name that acting tool.
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?
It provides concrete usage context: dialogs are usually waiting after a timed-out call or when an analysis status is needs_user. It does not explicitly state exclusions or name lira_press_dialog_button as the follow-up action, but the context is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.