sys_state

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It signals a non-mutating snapshot through 'state' and 'last events', but does not disclose output shape, freshness, limits, or how the optional vm filtering affects results. It provides modest but not rich behavioral context.

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?

One sentence, no filler, with the four data domains front-loaded before the 'one answer' payoff. Every word contributes to the description's purpose.

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 tool aggregates multiple subsystems and there is no output schema or annotations, so the description must carry more weight. It lists the included categories but does not explain how they are structured, whether the optional vm filter affects all categories, or what 'last events' covers. This is adequate for selection but leaves invocation details to inference.

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%, so the only parameter (vm) is already described as 'Limit to one VM'. The overall description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond this baseline; it does reinforce that the result is an aggregate answer.

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 identifies the tool as a consolidated read/state query returning VM power status, debugger state, terminal sessions, and recent events. The listed domains distinguish it from narrower sibling tools such as vm_state, kd_state, and term_list.

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?

It implies use when a single consolidated state answer is desired ('in one answer'), but gives no explicit when-not conditions or pointers to alternatives. There are many overlapping sibling tools, and the description does not explain how sys_state relates to them.

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