Read a workspace store

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context: read-only, free, scoped to the workspace, and acting as a raw key-based accessor rather than a typed interface.

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 efficiently front-loaded with the core operation and purpose, then gives the allowed keys, then ends with routing guidance. No sentences are wasted, and the structure makes the key information easy to scan.

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 read-only, two-parameter tool with a full input schema, the description is complete: it covers purpose, scope, allowed values, alternatives, and safety. The default limit is already documented in the schema, so its absence from the description is not a gap.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds significant meaning by listing the exact allowed key values, which the schema only vaguely describes as 'one of the allowlisted keys'. This helps an agent choose a valid key without external knowledge.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Read one of this workspace's data stores by key' and lists what kind of data the stores hold. It also distinguishes itself from sibling typed tools like list_memory and get_brand, so an agent can tell them apart without opening schemas.

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 explicitly names the friendlier typed tools (list_memory / list_skills / get_brand) and says to use store_get for the rest. It also enumerates the allowed keys, giving concrete guidance on when and how to invoke the tool.

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