rlp_codec

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

With no annotations, the description fully explains the tool's behavior: input formats for encode vs decode, output structure ({encoded: '0x...'} for encode, {decoded} with leaves as hex and lists as arrays). It also clarifies that encode accepts recursive structures. No behavioral traits (e.g., side effects, auth needs) are missing for this codec 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?

The description is concise, front-loaded with the core purpose, and uses efficient sentences. The example is placed at the end without redundancy, earning its place.

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 the complexity of a recursive codec tool, the description covers input schemas (both action and data), output format via text, and provides an example. No output schema exists, but the description sufficiently explains return values for both actions.

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%, but the description adds significant meaning beyond the schema: it explains the recursive structure for data, the leaf types (hex string, integer), and action's purpose. The example further clarifies the expected format and output.

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 the tool's purpose: 'RLP-encode structured data, or RLP-decode a hex string.' This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like abi_codec or decode by explicitly naming RLP.

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 provides clear context for usage (encoding structured data or decoding hex strings) and includes an example. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives among siblings, which would improve guidance.

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