decompress_file

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden but discloses almost nothing. It does not state whether existing files at 'dst' are overwritten, where extraction lands, what permissions result, or that 'secret' is a password for encrypted archives - all critical for a filesystem-mutating operation.

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 words are technically concise, but this is under-specification rather than efficient brevity. Nothing is front-loaded because there is essentially no content to structure.

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 mutation tool with three required undocumented parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. An agent lacks the information needed to call it correctly or safely.

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% and four parameters are undocumented in the schema. The description adds no meaning for any of them: 'path', 'dst', 'type' (apparently the archive format), and 'secret' (likely a password) are left entirely for the agent to guess.

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 ('Decompress') and resource ('archive'), so the basic operation is identifiable. However, it does not distinguish this from the inverse sibling compress_files or indicate what archive formats are supported, leaving the scope vague.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like compress_files, nor any prerequisites such as whether the destination must exist or be empty. The agent must infer usage entirely.

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