mike_results_read

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

Without annotations, the description should disclose read-only nature and potential side effects. It mentions downsampling and license requirement but omits error behavior or whether it modifies data. The information is minimal.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the action and provides key details without unnecessary words.

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 returns data but the description lacks details on the output format beyond 'times+values'. There is no output schema, so more specifics on the structure would be beneficial. The context is 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?

Schema coverage is 75%, so description adds some value. It clarifies that max_points caps returned points (default 5000) and mentions 'no license needed' but does not explain the res1d parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 extracts one time series from a MIKE+ .res1d file, specifying the output format and downsampling. It distinguishes from sibling tools like mike_get_values and mike_results_list by focusing on a single time series extraction.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as mike_get_values or mike_results_summary. The note 'no license needed' is a positive but does not clarify usage context.

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