stream_samples

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full behavioral burden and falls short. It does not say whether sampling consumes/clears the buffer or is non-destructive, what happens when the buffer is empty or the stream isn't running, or whether the call blocks — all critical for a buffer-reading streaming tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the sampling cap and strategy both appear before the resource clause. Nothing is wasted.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must explain what a returned sample looks like — yet it never does. For a streaming tool where capture timing and buffer state matter, the missing return shape and empty-buffer behavior leave an agent unable to predict results.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description does some of the work: “up to max_samples” clarifies it's a cap, and “evenly spaced” explains how the subset is chosen — neither is in the schema. But it omits the default of 500 and what the spacing is computed over (time window vs whole buffer).

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 names a specific verb (“Return”), a specific resource (“samples from the running stream's buffer”), and even the selection strategy (“evenly spaced”). It's distinct from siblings like stream_start/stream_stop/stream_status, but it never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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?

“From the running stream's buffer” implies the stream must already be started, which is a useful precondition delivered implicitly. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no statement of what happens if the stream is stopped, and no mention of alternatives such as stream_status for inspecting the stream.

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