pyocd_svd_read

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

Without annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It states it is a read operation returning decoded values, which is adequate. However, it omits error behavior (e.g., invalid peripheral/register), side effects, or required permissions.

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 two sentences plus an example, with no wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded ('Read a peripheral register by name'), making it immediately scannable.

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?

Given an output schema exists (not shown), the description does not need to detail return format. It adequately explains the read-by-name concept and bit-field decoding. Minor gaps (e.g., error handling, availability of SVD data) prevent a 5.

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?

Both parameters are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds an example showing actual parameter values ('GPIOA', 'IDR'), reinforcing usage beyond the schema definitions. This justifies a score above baseline 3.

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 it reads a peripheral register by name and returns value with bit-field decoding, providing a concrete example. It distinguishes from sibling tools like `pyocd_svd_write` (write) and `pyocd_svd_list_registers` (list).

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 offers a usage example but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., `pyocd_register_read`, `pyocd_svd_list_registers`). It lacks when-not-to-use or comparison cues, which is a significant gap given the large sibling set.

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