rtt_read_raw

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses key behaviors: non-draining, multi-consumer safe, offset handling for rotation, and return format. No contradictions.

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, no fluff. Every word adds value.

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?

Completely covers usage pattern, behavior, and return structure for a tool with simple parameters and no output schema. No gaps.

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%; description adds critical context beyond schema: explains the relationship between offset and next_offset, rotation handling, and the purpose of max_bytes implicitly through the return format.

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 specifies the action ('Read new bytes from the broadcast log starting at a byte offset') and distinguishes from siblings by highlighting 'non-draining and multi-consumer safe' behavior, contrasting with other RTT read tools.

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 context for when to use this tool ('ideal for a continuous monitor that must coexist with other readers without stealing their data') and includes usage instructions for handling offset and rotation. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' but the sibling list implies alternatives.

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