Encode numeric arrays into run-length runs or decode runs back into numeric arrays to compress or reconstruct sequence data.
Run-length encode a numeric array into runs, or decode runs back to a numeric array.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | No | Numeric array to encode | |
| runs | No | Runs to decode | |
| operation | Yes | Operation (default encode) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.11Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden and does state the core transformation: encoding returns runs and decoding returns a numeric array. However, it omits edge conditions, conditional input requirements, and error behavior, so it is adequate but incomplete.
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 a single front-loaded sentence that covers both supported operations without any filler. It is appropriately sized and wastes no words.
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 low complexity and full schema description coverage, the description is nearly complete. It qualitatively explains both return directions, but it does not mention conditional parameter requirements or error handling, and no output schema exists to supplement it.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the data, runs, and operation parameters. The description adds only a high-level restatement of what data and runs are used for, not meaning beyond the schema.
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: run-length encode a numeric array into runs or decode runs back to a numeric array. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as rl_encode or runlength_process.
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 does not say when to use this tool instead of alternatives, nor does it provide conditions or exclusions. It only describes the two supported operations, leaving usage context entirely to the agent.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.