query_viewport_state

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true, and the description aligns by saying 'Read'. It adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotation: the tool captures exact state for later restoration, implying a pairing with a set/restore operation. No contradictions found.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the core action and resource, and every clause earns its place. The restoral purpose adds useful context without bloat.

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 zero parameters, a read-only annotation, and no output schema, the description gives enough context for an agent to call the tool: it explains what is read and why. It could more precisely enumerate the returned state fields, but this is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.

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 has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so the description carries no parameter burden. The baseline of 4 applies because there is nothing to document and the description correctly focuses on semantics of the operation.

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?

Description clearly states the tool 'Reads' a specific resource (viewport camera and overlay state) with 'exact' precision. It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like set_viewport_state (write) and query_viewport_visibility (only visibility).

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 phrase 'so it can be restored after visual inspection' communicates the intended workflow and context for using this tool. It implicitly contrasts with set_viewport_state and query_viewport_visibility, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions.

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