ads_read

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes beyond that by disclosing decoding behavior: structs/FBs become a nested datatype table, TIME/DATE get readable text, enums get names, and oversized trees are truncated to member names plus sizes.

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?

Three dense sentences with the core behavior front-loaded, followed by decode specifics and the truncation escape hatch. No filler, though the output-format detail is arguably more than needed given an output schema exists.

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?

Return-value rendering is well explained (and an output schema exists anyway), and safety is covered by annotations. However, with three of four parameters undocumented at 0% schema coverage, the definition is not complete enough for an agent to tune the call confidently.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden, yet only max_chars is given meaning (the truncation threshold). max_members, expand_struct, and the name format are entirely undocumented in both schema and description.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read one symbol') with a distinguishing qualifier ('type-aware decoding'). The 'one symbol' phrasing implicitly separates it from ads_read_many, and 'type-aware' implies a difference from ads_read_raw, though neither sibling is named directly.

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?

Gives an explicit routing rule: when the decoded tree exceeds max_chars it is summarised, so use ads_leaves or ads_dump instead. This is clear conditional guidance, but it does not cover when to prefer ads_read over ads_read_raw or ads_read_many.

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