decode_packet

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds behavioral context by explaining the return format options (verbose vs JSON) and hex dump inclusion, but does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, or other side effects beyond what annotations cover.

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 concise and well-structured, with a single opening sentence and a clean list of arguments. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

With 4 parameters, no output schema, and annotations present, the description covers parameter semantics but does not describe the return value structure or potential error conditions. It is adequate but lacks details on output format and prerequisites beyond the parameter list.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It provides brief but clear explanations for all four parameters: filepath (path to PCAP file), packet_number (1-based), verbose (return type), and hex_dump (include hex dump). This adds meaning beyond the schema titles.

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 decodes a single packet in full detail, specifying the verb (decode) and resource (single packet). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_packet_summary by emphasizing 'full detail' and 'single packet'.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_packet_summary or deep_packet_analysis. It lacks explicit context for when this tool is appropriate or when to choose other tools.

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