Dump visible UI

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context: the tree is flat and bounded, and includes text, geometry, and interaction state, which goes beyond the annotations.

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 one sentence, front-loaded with the verb 'Read', and contains no redundant information. Every word contributes to the 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?

Adequate for a read-only inspection tool with strong annotations, but it lacks guidance on parameter effects and return shape. With five optional parameters and no output schema, additional detail on semantics would improve completeness.

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?

Schema description coverage is only 20% (only clientId is documented). The tool description does not elaborate on parameters like maxItems, textLimit, interactiveOnly, or includeOffscreen, failing to compensate for the low coverage. Parameter names and defaults provide some hints but are insufficient.

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 specifies the action 'Read' and the resource: a flat, bounded tree of visible PlayerGui/gethui/CoreGui elements including text, geometry, and interaction state. This is specific enough to distinguish it from sibling tools like get_tree (generic tree) or click_ui (interaction).

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 conveys when to use this tool: when you need a read-only, bounded view of visible UI elements. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear for agent selection among siblings.

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