hexdump

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond that: the row layout of the output and the fact that ranges extending past mapped bytes still return something rather than failing. The wording of that out-of-range behavior ('shows what is there') is slightly vague about whether it pads, errors, or truncates, which keeps it from a 5.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the core behavior and output format, followed by routing exclusions. Nothing redundant with schema or annotations is repeated.

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 two-parameter read-only tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose, output shape, and alternatives adequately. The only soft spot is the imprecise description of what happens when the range exceeds mapped memory.

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 address forms (0x-hex, decimal, name, `off:<n>`) and the length default/max of 4096 are already fully documented. The description only restates the address framing and adds no syntax or constraint detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb (hexdump) and resource (raw bytes at an address) plus the exact output shape (`address hex |ascii|` rows). It also rules out three sibling tools by name, so an agent can distinguish it from read, strings, and live_read without inspecting 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?

Explicit negative routing: not for typed values (use read), not for text (use strings), not for a live process (live_read). Each exclusion names the correct alternative, giving a clear decision rule for when to pick this tool.

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