get_look_fixture_values

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. '(read-only)' is a genuine safety disclosure that tells the agent this call will not mutate state, which is valuable. However, it says nothing about what 'fixture values' actually contains (DMX levels, intensity, color?) or how current/real-time the values are.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It is efficient, though arguably too terse to earn a top mark given how little it conveys about the return payload.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should ideally explain the shape and meaning of the returned fixture values; it does not. For a simple one-parameter read tool it is minimally adequate, but it leaves the agent guessing at the response content.

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 100% for the single lookId parameter, so the schema already documents it fully. The description adds no format, source, or sourcing detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get current fixture values for a look'), so the agent knows exactly what is retrieved. It does not, however, distinguish itself from close siblings like get_look_fixtures or get_look, which an agent could easily confuse when looking for fixture data.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance and never names an alternative. The parenthetical '(read-only)' hints at a safe inspection use case but does not say when to prefer this over get_look_fixtures, get_look, or get_current_active_look.

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