get_editor_state

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the read-only safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond those annotations by stating that it targets the 'selected live editor' and that the output includes entity IDs and world-unit coordinates. This gives the agent a clearer picture of what the call will observe.

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 short, front-loaded with the action, and uses its second sentence to state the return contents without padding. The only minor redundancy is the 'get_editor_state:' prefix repeating the tool name, but it does not materially hurt clarity.

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 simple read tool with strong annotations, the description conveys the main behavior and return contents. However, it omits how sessionId maps to the selected editor and what 'selected' means in this context, and it does not clarify whether a caller must first establish a selection. These omissions leave some room for incorrect 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 should compensate for the undocumented sessionId parameter. It does not mention sessionId or explain how it identifies the live editor to read. The parameter name and pattern provide some basic guidance, but the description fails to connect it to the 'selected live editor' concept.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'read the selected live editor.' It also specifies what the operation returns: 'entity IDs and world-unit coordinates.' It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like inspect_map or list_editor_sessions, but the resource and return-value detail make the core purpose clear.

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 given about when to use this tool versus its alternatives. The description implies it is for reading the current live editor state, but it does not say when to prefer it over list_editor_sessions or inspect_map, nor does it mention prerequisites such as having a selected or active session.

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