arvan_s3_get_object

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds the truncation behavior. However, it does not disclose other behaviors like error handling for missing objects, authentication needs, or output format details beyond base64.

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 that front-load the purpose and then provide critical behavioral context. Every word is necessary; no redundancy.

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 simple read tool with annotations, the description covers the core purpose, encoding option, and size limitation. It lacks details on error responses or exact output format, but is sufficient for an agent to use correctly.

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 0%, but the description adds meaning to 'as_base64' by explaining its effect. Bucket and key are not elaborated, though they are standard S3 concepts. The description partially compensates for the lack of parameter documentation.

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 downloads an object, and mentions it can return text or base64. It distinguishes from siblings like arvan_s3_head_object (metadata only) and arvan_s3_put_object (upload). The truncation hint further specifies scope.

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 mentions a size limit (256 KiB) and advises using a presigned URL for larger files, providing a clear when-to-use vs. when-not-to-use guideline. It doesn't list alternatives for small files or other scenarios, but the advice is direct.

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