pull

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It states return type ('raw JSON document') and version ('full v0.2 packet'), but does not explicitly mention read-only nature or potential side effects. However, the verb 'Fetch' implies read-only.

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 sentences, each with clear purpose: first defines action and return, second gives usage guidance. No redundant 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?

Given simple schema (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), description covers what the tool does, when to use it, and what it returns. Minor gap: no mention of error cases, but adequate for the complexity level.

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 has one parameter 'id' with description 'Packet ID,' and coverage is 100%. Description adds no additional parameter details beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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?

Description states 'Fetch a packet by ID and return the raw JSON document,' providing a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from siblings by mentioning 'full v0.2 packet' and naming 'show' and 'resume' as alternatives.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use when you need the full v0.2 packet — otherwise prefer 'show' or 'resume'.' This gives clear context for when to use and directs to alternatives, meeting the highest standard.

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