get_switcher_state

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation, and the listed fields usefully disclose the scope of returned data. However, it does not state whether this is a safe, side-effect-free read, nor does it mention polling/rate considerations or consistency of T-bar position during transitions.

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 sentence that front-loads the core purpose and then lists the specific fields. No filler, no 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?

For a parameterless read tool with no output schema, the description adequately specifies what information is returned. It could be slightly more complete by confirming the read-only nature and whether values reflect live program/preview output.

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 document. Baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description correctly avoids any misleading parameter discussion.

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 ('Get') and resource ('switcher state'), then enumerates exactly what state is returned: Program source, Preview source, active effect/transition, T-bar position. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_record_state, get_stream_state, and get_audio_state, which each target different subsystems.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. Use is implied by the tool name and read-only nature, but the description does not compare it against alternatives or mention preconditions.

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