cb_state

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. 'Current state' weakly implies a non-mutating read, but there is no explicit statement that the call is safe, read-only, or that it discloses what information is returned or how it behaves.

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 extremely short and direct, with no filler words or redundant restatement. It is efficient for a zero-parameter resource, though its brevity doubles as under-specification in other dimensions.

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 zero-parameter state getter with an output schema, a minimal description can be acceptable. However, the meaning of 'current state' is ambiguous in a tool family with many CustomBuild inspection commands, so the description alone is not fully sufficient for an agent to confidently select and invoke it.

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 zero parameters and the input schema is empty, so there are no parameter meanings that the description needs to clarify. The baseline for a no-parameter tool applies, and the description suffers no parameter-semantics 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 names the resource ('CustomBuild') and the data area ('current state'), but it is a noun phrase with no verb and no detail about what 'state' includes. It does not clearly distinguish itself from nearby siblings like cb_versions, cb_options, or cb_software, which also expose current CustomBuild information.

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 guidance about when to call this tool versus alternatives such as cb_versions, cb_options, or cb_logs. The description implies it is a status/state read, but nothing states when it should be preferred or avoided.

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