rtt_read

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Mentions clean, parsed format but doesn't disclose behavior when no lines, read limits beyond count, or blocking nature.

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 with no fluff. All words are needed and meaningful.

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?

Simple tool with no output schema; description adequately states core action but could improve by hinting at return value (e.g., 'returns list of lines').

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 (100%) means baseline 3. Description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema's count parameter definition.

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?

Clear verb 'read' and resource 'RTT log lines' with specific format mention ('clean, parsed Zephyr format'). Distinguishes from sibling RTT tools like rtt_clear, rtt_send, etc.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives like rtt_search. Implied usage is reading recent logs, but lacks when-not-to-use scenarios.

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