sage_show_raw

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

Although no annotations are provided, the description includes a behavioral guarantee ('compression never destroys the original'), adding transparency. However, it omits details like read-only nature, required permissions, or error handling when run_id is invalid.

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 a single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It conveys the purpose and a key behavioral trait efficiently.

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?

The tool has one optional parameter and no output schema. The description explains the purpose and a guarantee, but does not describe what is returned (e.g., format, size). For a retrieval tool, this is only partially 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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the parameter is already well-documented. The description adds minimal value by repeating 'by ID', but does not provide additional context beyond the schema.

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 recovers exact stored output of a previous run by ID, specifying the action and resource distinctly. It distinguishes from siblings like sage_get_history which likely show summaries rather than raw output.

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 implicitly indicates usage when you need raw output by run ID, but offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sage_get_history or sage_explain_error. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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