topbar-report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral expectations. It states 'report' implicitly suggesting a read-only operation, but does not explicitly confirm safety, side effects, or output format. This lack of explicit transparency about potential side effects or return structure is a gap.

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, concise sentence with no redundant information. It efficiently communicates the tool's scope without fluff, making it easy to parse.

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 report tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently captures the essential context (what is reported). It could be more detailed about the exact contents of the report, but given the simplicity, it is nearly complete.

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 tool has no parameters, so schema coverage is trivially complete. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it adds no additional meaning beyond the empty schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 that the tool reports active topbar context, workspace, scene, and search capability, making its primary purpose evident. It distinguishes itself from related tools like 'topbar-command_search' by focusing on overall context rather than a specific command action.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternative report tools (e.g., 'scene-info' or 'ui-state'). The description implies it is for retrieving topbar state, but lacks direct comparison or situational advice, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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