Read dispatches

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses two important behaviors: body=teaser is truncated and must not be used for conclusions, and missing IDs are named in the reply rather than silently dropped. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three sentences with no filler: first states the purpose, second delivers a critical caveat, third explains missing-ID behavior. Each sentence adds essential information and the most important usage guidance is front-loaded.

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 a simple one-parameter signature, an existing output schema, and annotations covering read-only behavior, the description covers all remaining ambiguity: how IDs are obtained, the teaser truncation trap, and recovery steps for stale IDs. Nothing important is missing.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden for the 'ids' parameter. It explains that IDs come from wire_latest or wire_search and describes what happens when IDs are not in the archive, giving the agent enough context to supply valid values.

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 it retrieves stored text of specific dispatches by IDs returned from wire_latest or wire_search, which clearly identifies the operation and distinguishes it from the sibling list/search tools. The title 'Read dispatches' reinforces the verb and resource.

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?

It explicitly instructs the agent to supply IDs returned by wire_latest or wire_search, and advises re-running those tools if IDs are stale or missing. It also warns not to treat teaser text as the full article, providing clear contextual guidance.

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