mureo_state_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully bears the burden. It describes the read operation, the fields returned, and the empty default doc when absent. It also notes path restrictions, but lacks details on error handling for malformed files.

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 sentences deliver the full purpose and details. The most critical information (read STATE.json, return parsed doc, default behavior) is front-loaded. No unnecessary 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?

No output schema exists, so the description appropriately lists the fields of the returned document. It covers the default empty doc case. While not exhaustive about types, it is sufficient for an agent to understand what to expect.

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 schema already describes the 'path' parameter, but the description adds valuable context: defaults to a specific file and that outside paths are refused. This goes beyond the schema's description.

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 reads STATE.json and returns a parsed v2 document with specific fields. It distinguishes from sibling tools that modify state (e.g., mureo_state_upsert_campaign).

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 description explains the tool reads STATE.json with an optional path, default location, and path restrictions. While it doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives, the context makes it clear this is for reading vs. writing state.

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