getRecorderState

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool returns state fields, and 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but it doesn't clarify preconditions like whether the recorder must be enabled/started, or what happens if it isn't.

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 purpose and lists the return fields. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description is nearly complete: it enumerates all expected return fields. However, terms like 'action count' and 'current tab' are slightly ambiguous without further type or format details, though this is a minor gap.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is trivially complete (100% coverage). The description doesn't need to explain parameters, earning the baseline score of 4 for zero-parameter tools.

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 ('Get') and resource ('current recorder state'), then enumerates the exact returned fields: isRecording, isPaused, action count, current tab. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling recording-control tools like startRecording and stopRecording.

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 phrase 'Get current recorder state' clearly communicates the tool's purpose and implies when to use it, but it doesn't explicitly mention exclusions or alternative tools. No direct sibling tool competes for this functionality, so this is adequate.

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