ui_get_snap_mode

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It conveys that the tool is a non-mutating read of global state, but it does not explicitly state that it has no side effects or describe the returned snap mode format. For a zero-parameter getter this is acceptable but minimal.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence that states the core purpose and relevant scope. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundant 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 no-argument getter, the description is mostly sufficient, but there is no output schema and the description does not hint at what values 'snap mode' can return. An agent could invoke the tool correctly but may not know how to interpret the result without additional context.

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?

There are no parameters, so the schema and description are fully aligned and there is nothing additional to explain. The description adds context about the global scope and editing contexts, which is relevant despite the absence of parameters.

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 returns the current global snap mode and scopes its relevance to playlist and piano roll editing. The word 'current' plus the get_ prefix distinguishes it from the sibling ui_set_snap_mode without ambiguity.

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 provides clear context that this is a read-style query for the current snap mode, which is enough to tell when to use it. It does not explicitly name ui_set_snap_mode as the alternative for changing snap mode, but the get/set sibling pair makes the usage boundary obvious.

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