get_current_show_state

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It doesn't disclose whether this is a read-only probe, whether it might have side effects, how the returned state is structured, or whether polling is costly/frequent. For a status tool the read-only nature is implied but not stated.

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 efficient sentence that states the action and its scope. Zero waste, front-loaded with the verb. Appropriate for a simple zero-parameter status tool.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description is reasonably complete on purpose. However, it does not describe the return format, frequency expectations for polling, or whether this is safe to call repeatedly. Sibling tools (get_obs_health, get_debug_config) offer overlapping 'get state' functions, and the description alone doesn't clarify where the boundaries are.

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 0 parameters with 100% schema coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to explain parameters. The description briefly indicates what the returned state covers (segments, overlays, timers), which is essentially all the semantic value needed.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'get current show state.' The description names the areas covered (segments, overlays, timers), which is specific enough to distinguish purpose. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_debug_config or get_obs_health, but the subject matter is distinct.

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 guidance on when to use this vs alternatives like get_obs_health or get_scene_list. There's no mention of when calling is appropriate, whether it should precede actions, or how often to poll. The 'current show state' context is implied but no exclusions or alternatives are given.

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