get_graph_state

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavior, and it does: 'Retrieve' signals a read-only operation. The list of returned data (ASCII table, Mermaid, phase progress, nodes, errors, timeline) adds transparency about what the tool exposes, though it doesn't mention potential side effects or environmental dependencies.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core purpose and then enumerates the included data. Every word carries meaning, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description enumerates the major sections of the returned state, giving the agent a clear picture of what to expect. The optional boolean parameters are fully documented in the schema, so the tool is completely usable based on this description.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage for both parameters with clear descriptions of the boolean flags (includeMermaid, includeAsciiTable). The description adds no extra parameter detail, so the baseline of 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?

The description uses the specific verb 'Retrieve' with the resource 'current workflow graph state', and enumerates the exact contents (ASCII table, Mermaid diagram, phase progress, nodes, error logs, execution timeline). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_phase_status or get_node_timeline, which target narrower aspects.

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 for a comprehensive state snapshot but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives. It mentions no exclusions or direct comparisons with sibling tools like get_phase_status, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.

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