get_current_patcher

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral transparency. It only says 'Return summary metadata,' which implies a read operation, but does not disclose what the metadata contains, whether bridge_session_id affects behavior, or any potential side effects. This leaves significant 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. It immediately states the action and the resource, which is ideal for quick parsing by an agent.

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?

This is a simple getter with an output schema present, so return values need not be explained. However, the meaning of 'currently attached patcher' and the bridge_session_id parameter are left unexplained, which creates context gaps for an agent unfamiliar with the Max ecosystem. The description is minimally adequate but not 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 schema has one optional parameter, bridge_session_id, with 0% description coverage. The tool description does not mention the parameter at all, so it adds no meaning beyond the bare schema. With such low coverage, the description must compensate, and it fails to do so.

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 uses a specific verb 'Return' and clearly identifies the resource: 'summary metadata for the currently attached patcher.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_patcher_boxes or get_selected_max_device, which address different aspects of patchers.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no explicit alternatives, exclusions, or context about when 'currently attached patcher' is relevant. The only clue is the implied use case, which is not stated.

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