get_state

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden of conveying behavioral traits. 'Get details' implies a safe read-only operation, but it does not disclose error behavior, permission requirements, or what exactly constitutes 'details.' The description adds minimal context beyond the name.

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 concise, with a front-loaded purpose sentence followed by a clean parameter list. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

Given that an output schema exists (per context signals), the description does not need to explain return values. It adequately documents the two required parameters, making the tool invocable. It lacks usage context and parameter depth, but for a simple getter, it is functionally complete.

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 description renames both parameters with brief explanations ('The UUID identifier of the project' and 'The UUID identifier of the state'), adding the fact that they are UUIDs. However, this is only slightly more informative than the schema's titles and types, and it does not clarify their relationship or required formats.

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 action ('Get details') and the resource ('a specific state'), making it easy to identify the tool's purpose. It does not explicitly distinguish from sibling getter tools like get_label, but the resource name is unambiguous.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as list_states for retrieving multiple states. It also lacks any mention of prerequisites or contexts in which this tool is preferred.

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