csv_extract

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the ability to write to file for binary data (e.g., base64 images) and implies it handles large/truncated fields. However, it does not mention potential side effects, output truncation behavior, or the decode parameter, leaving some gaps.

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 three concise sentences with no redundant information. It front-loads the core purpose and adds only high-value behavioral context, making every sentence earn its place.

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 tool's moderate complexity (5 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the essential purpose, key use case, and a notable behavioral trait (file writing). It does not explain all parameters or return behavior, but the schema compensates for parameter details, making the description reasonably 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds some meaning by indicating that outputFile is for binary data and that the tool handles large/truncated field data, but it does not significantly elaborate on parameter usage beyond what the schema already provides.

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 action ('Extract a specific field value from a CSV record') with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by specifying the use case for large/truncated field data, which is unique among the related 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?

The description provides clear context for when to use this tool: 'Use for retrieving large/truncated field data.' It also mentions writing to file for binary data, giving additional usage guidance. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it.

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