get_storage

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It discloses the two modes (all entries vs. specific key) and implies no side effects. However, it does not specify error cases (e.g., missing key) or behavior for empty storage, which would enhance transparency.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the main verb. Every word contributes meaning; no redundant or filler content. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 and two optional parameters, the description adequately explains the tool's function. It lacks details on the return format (e.g., object structure), which would improve completeness, but it covers the primary use cases.

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 reinforces the parameter purposes (key for specific retrieval, storageType for choice) but adds minimal new meaning beyond the schema. It serves as a summary but not a deeper explanation.

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 reads from localStorage or sessionStorage, with two modes: all entries or a specific key. It uses a specific verb ('read') and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like set_storage and delete_storage.

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 implies usage for reading storage, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., set_storage, delete_storage). No exclusions or context for when not to use it are provided.

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