Get source state

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral burden, but it only states 'Get the settings and visibility state of one source.' It does not disclose any side effects, error behavior, permission requirements, or whether the source must exist. This is a significant transparency gap for a tool with no annotation support.

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 sentence with no wasted words, earning a high conciseness score. However, it is slightly under-sized given the need to explain parameters, so it does not reach 5.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description does not fully cover the input context: scene_name is unexplained, and there is no annotation support. The tool is simple but with 2 parameters and no schema descriptions, the description is incomplete for reliable invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It confirms source_name is the identifier but does not explain the role of scene_name, which is optional. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, leaving parameter meaning ambiguous.

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 'Get the settings and visibility state of one source' clearly states the verb (Get), resource (settings and visibility state), and scope (one source). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_sources (multiple) and get_source_transform (specific to transform).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_source_transform or show_source. There is no mention of alternatives, exclusions, or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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