bricks_get_full_state

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

With no annotations, the description discloses that no file is written and enumerates all state components included. It lacks details on performance, size limits, or authorization, but is still transparent about core behavior.

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?

Two concise sentences with no fluff. Key action and usage are front-loaded clearly.

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 parameterless tool, the description fully explains what it returns and its purpose. No output schema is needed given the simple JSON response.

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?

No parameters exist, so description cannot add parameter-level meaning. However, it adds context on output format (JSON) and usage, which compensates for the lack of param details.

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?

Description clearly states the tool returns the live full-state of the Bricks layer as JSON without writing a file. It lists included content (all pages, drafts, templates, etc.) and distinguishes from write operations like backup creation.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use to inspect or to save a backup snapshot locally on the client,' providing direct guidance. Does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but context with sibling tools (e.g., bricks_create_full_backup) implies differentiation.

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