s3_get_object

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

The description discloses the 1 MiB inline cap, base64 return encoding, streaming behavior via saveToPath, and that the presigned URL path keeps object bytes out of the server/model context. This goes well beyond the sparse annotations and gives an agent a clear behavioral model with no contradiction.

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?

Two dense sentences front-load the primary behavior and decision rule, then route to the sibling tool. Every clause earns its place and there is no repetition of schema or annotation content.

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?

For a 5-parameter tool with no output schema and sparse annotations, the description covers the key facts an agent needs: size limits, return encoding, local streaming, and the correct sibling for real object data. Required parameters remain obvious from the schema, and no critical behavior is left unexplained.

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 meaningful usage semantics for saveToPath ('stream any size to a local path') and clarifies that inline reads are limited to small objects returned as base64. It does not elaborate on range or versionId, but those are already adequately described in 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Read a SMALL object inline' with concrete constraints (≤1 MiB, returned base64) and explicitly contrasts with s3_get_presigned_url. An agent can immediately distinguish this tool from sibling object-access 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?

It explicitly says when to use the inline path (manifests, sidecars, configs), when to use saveToPath for any size, and when to use s3_get_presigned_url for real object data. The exclusion is clear and names the exact sibling alternative.

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