ipc_get_backend_state

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true. The description adds the requirement for an active driver_session and notes default targeting behavior, which provides additional context. No behavioral contradictions found, but no further depth beyond what is implied.

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 two sentences, front-loading the Tauri-specific nature and what it does, then immediately stating the prerequisite and use case. No wasted words.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose and output (app metadata, version, environment). While there is no output schema, the description sufficiently explains what is returned for a simple state retrieval tool. Could optionally mention that it returns a JSON object, but not necessary.

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 coverage is 100%. The description explains the appIdentifier parameter's purpose and default behavior, adding meaning beyond the schema's type and description fields. It clarifies that the parameter is optional and how the default is chosen.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves Tauri backend state including app metadata, Tauri version, and environment. It is specific about the resource and verb, and the bracket '[Tauri Apps Only]' distinguishes it from sibling tools that may not be Tauri-specific.

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 states the prerequisite 'Requires active driver_session' and suggests using the tool to verify connectivity and obtain app info. However, it does not mention when not to use it or alternative tools for other purposes.

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