cu_observe

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It explicitly says 'state read' (safe, read-only) and 'compact' with 'top-K controls' (not exhaustive), which is meaningful. It doesn't cover permissions or side effects, but for a read tool this is sufficient.

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, tightly worded sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose and return values. Every word earns its place; no filler or repetition.

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?

Despite an output schema, the description is too sparse for a tool with 7 parameters and no annotations. It omits key parameters like output_mode, vision, and preset, and offers no usage alternatives. The core idea is present but not enough 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 coverage is 0%, and the description only adds meaning for 'app' (one app) and 'top-K' (max_results indirectly). Seven parameters exist, but intent, preset, vision, output_mode, and include_screenshot are unexplained in both schema and description, leaving a significant gap.

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 states this is a 'Compact state read for one app' with a specific verb ('read') and resource ('one app'), and it names the return values ('top-K controls and a state_id'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like cu_act (actions) and cu_metrics (metrics).

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 context is implied: use this when you need a compact state read for a single app. However, there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives like cu_metrics or cu_find_app.

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