read_archive_entry

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Indicates it's a read operation (non-destructive) but lacks details on encoding, handling of binary content, error cases, or any side effects. Adequate but not thorough.

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?

Single sentence, no superfluous words, front-loaded with the core action and resource. Every word earns its place.

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 output schema, the description is adequate for a simple read operation but omits details like return format (e.g., plain text, assumed UTF-8), behavior for non-text entries, and error conditions (missing archive/entry). Could be more complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema; it merely states the tool's purpose. No enhancement or degradation.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Read' and resource 'text contents of a file entry inside an archive', specifying supported formats (ZIP, TAR, TAR.GZ). Distinguishes well from sibling tools like list_archive_entries (lists entries) and read_file (reads plain files).

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?

Describes what the tool does but provides no guidance on when to use it vs alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. Agent must infer usage from context.

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