get_premiere_state

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it offers none. It does not indicate read-only nature, side effects, required connection, or return format, making the tool behavior completely opaque.

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 brief, but brevity without substance is not conciseness; it is under-specification. The single sentence lacks structure and essential content, failing to inform the user.

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?

Given no output schema, no annotations, and a vague description, the tool cannot be correctly invoked or interpreted. It is wholly inadequate for understanding what the state refers to or what the tool returns, making it nearly unusable without external knowledge.

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?

Since the tool has zero parameters, the description is not required to explain any. The input schema is an empty object, and the description adds nothing, but the baseline for 0 params is 4, so this score reflects that the description adequately covers the (nonexistent) parameter space.

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 restates the tool name ('get premiere state') with a vague 'expanded operation' prefix, offering no specific action or resource detail. It does not differentiate from numerous sibling get_* tools such as get_project_info or get_playhead_position, making its purpose unclear.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks any context about suitable scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction among the many similar tools.

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