Get Upstream Keyer State

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful return-content context — type, sources, on-air status, DVE position/size, key settings — though it says nothing about output shape limits or per-keyer ordering.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose and return fields in one sentence. The Args block largely duplicates the schema, but the overall length is appropriate and there is little wasted text.

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?

For a single-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is nearly complete: annotations cover safety, and the field list compensates for the absent output schema. Only alternative-tool routing is missing.

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 100% and already documents me with default 0 and the 0=ME1 mapping. The description merely restates the parameter and default, adding no syntax or range detail beyond the schema (which has minimum 0, maximum 3).

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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (upstream keyers on a mix effect bus) and enumerates the state fields returned. It is clearly distinguishable from the many atem_set_usk_* siblings that mutate the same resource.

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?

Usage is implied by the read-only getter nature and the setters among siblings, but the description never says when to use this versus alternatives like atem_get_transition_state or atem_get_supersource_state, nor any exclusions.

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