get_zustand_stores

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It says 'inspect' and 'finds', implying read-only, but does not state return format, filtering behavior, side effects, or whether it requires React DevTools to be enabled. This leaves significant behavioral ambiguity.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word is meaningful and there is no padding or irrelevant detail.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description must convey what the tool returns and any important caveats. It does not explain whether it returns full state or just store names, what happens when no filter is provided, or the scope of 'stores used in React components.' This is a significant gap for a debugging tool with a single optional parameter.

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 schema description for the one parameter is comprehensive (case-insensitive substring match), and schema coverage is 100%. The tool description itself does not add parameter details, but the schema already handles this dimension adequately, warranting the baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states it inspects Zustand store state and finds stores used in React components. It uses a specific verb ('inspect') and resource ('Zustand store state'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_redux_state by explicitly naming Zustand.

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 description implies when to use the tool (when you need to inspect Zustand store state) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. Given the many sibling debugging tools, explicit exclusions (e.g., 'for Redux use get_redux_state') would be helpful, but the core usage is clear enough.

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