get_strip_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden, and 'Read' clearly signals a non-destructive operation. It also adds useful detail like fader in dB. It does not describe error behavior or output formatting, but those are minor for a simple getter.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler. It names the action, the target, the returned fields, and units efficiently, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 low-complexity read tool with only two parameters and no output schema, the description adequately lists the returned fields and confirms the single-strip scope. It is slightly incomplete around valid index ranges per strip type and failure behavior, but the kind enum descriptions cover much of that 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?

The schema fully documents 'kind' with enum meanings, but 'index' only has min/max constraints and no semantic description. The tool description says 'one strip' but does not clarify how index relates to kind or what valid index ranges are, so the 50% schema coverage gap is not compensated.

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 states a clear action ('Read'), a precise resource ('one strip'), and the specific fields returned (name, fader in dB, mute, pan). This cleanly distinguishes it from sibling set_* tools and from list_strips.

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 implies use for reading a single strip's status, and 'one strip' contrasts with list_strips. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives like find_strip_by_name or osc_get, nor does it mention any exclusion cases.

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