Project status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds value by listing the specific categories of state returned (scan progress, timeline versions, renders, drive mount), which informs the agent about the scope of data. No contradictions.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that efficiently lists the key state aspects without redundancy. Every word carries meaning.

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 no parameters, no output schema, and clear sibling differentiation, the description fully specifies the tool's purpose and returns. No gaps remain for a simple status-read tool.

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 zero parameters and schema coverage is 100% (trivial). The description adds meaning by detailing what the tool returns, which is sufficient for a no-parameter tool. Baseline is 4.

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 'pipeline state for the active project' and enumerates specific aspects: scan/analysis progress, timeline versions, renders, and source drive mount status. This verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like skycut_analyze_footage or skycut_get_timeline, which are action-oriented.

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 implicitly tells when to use this tool: when you need an overview of the pipeline state for the current project. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, the context of siblings (e.g., skycut_health for system health, skycut_get_timeline for specific timeline details) provides indirect guidance.

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