Get recorder status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered; "safe to call any time" largely restates it. The description does add genuine behavioral context by naming the recorder states (idle, starting, recording, paused) and the permission surface it inspects, which matters since there is no output schema to enumerate return values.

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?

A single dense sentence front-loads the core answer (connected + what the recorder is doing) with no filler. The trailing "Safe to call any time" is slightly redundant with readOnlyHint=true, a minor cost.

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?

With no parameters and no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does enumerate the reported fields and state values. It omits the shape of the response (nesting, how permissions are represented), which keeps it below a 5.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The sentence about what it inspects is not a parameter concern.

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?

States a specific verb (report) and resource (recorder/extension status) and enumerates exactly what is reported: connection state, recorder state, mode, active tab, permissions. It is clearly distinct from the mutation siblings stop_recording, pause_recording, and resume_recording.

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?

"Safe to call any time" gives a clear condition for use with no exclusions needed for a read-only status check. It does not route the agent to related siblings such as probe_capture for permission probing or to start_recording for state transitions, so it stops short of a 5.

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