Classify unknown bytes

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: uses multiple detection methods (entropy, magic bytes, probes) and flags encrypted transports. It also states a limitation (cannot decode ciphertext). Minor gap: no mention of side effects or performance.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, each sentence adds value without redundancy. Extremely efficient and easy to parse.

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 the lack of output schema and annotations, the description is fairly complete: covers purpose, method, use cases, and input formats. Missing return value format and explicit requirement that at least one input (hex/base64) is needed, but overall sufficient for selection and invocation.

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 has 0% coverage, but description partially compensates by mentioning hex, base64, and exchange body (implied id). However, the 'side' parameter is not explained, and input requirements (at least one) are not explicitly stated. Provides meaningful context but leaves ambiguity.

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's purpose: to classify an unknown blob using entropy, magic bytes, and various probes. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on classification rather than network proxy operations.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use (to avoid decoding ciphertext, flag encrypted transports) and input formats (exchange body, raw hex/base64). Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool references, but context is sufficient for an AI agent.

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