get_gcode_state

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly indicates this is a read operation ('Get'), which implies non-destructive behavior. However, it doesn't mention potential side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or response format details that would be helpful for an agent.

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, efficient sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose and enumerates the specific state components retrieved. Every word serves a purpose with no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description adequately covers the purpose but lacks details about the return format, error conditions, or how the retrieved state components are structured. Given the complexity of G-code state information, more context about the output would be beneficial.

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 with 100% schema description coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately focuses on what the tool returns rather than inputs. A baseline of 4 is appropriate since there are no parameters to document.

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 the specific action ('Get') and the resource ('active G-code modal state'), listing the exact components retrieved (motion mode, coordinate system, units, distance mode, spindle, coolant). It distinguishes from siblings like get_machine_settings or get_machine_status by focusing on G-code state rather than general settings or status.

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 usage when G-code modal state information is needed, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_machine_status or get_system_info. It doesn't specify prerequisites, exclusions, or comparative contexts with sibling tools.

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