Bus Read

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states the read action but omits that the 'archive' parameter moves the message to .read/ after reading, a side effect that contradicts a simple read-only mental model. It also doesn't mention auth or rate limits, leaving a meaningful transparency gap.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the core action and result, with no redundant words. Every word earns its place and it is easily 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 the low parameter count and presence of an output schema, the description covers the read scope well. However, it omits the archive side effect and does not orient the agent among siblings, which are meaningful gaps for a tool with zero annotations.

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 the schema already documents message_id and archive thoroughly. The description adds no param-specific semantics—mentions payload and context refs but doesn't elaborate on how parameters affect the result, justifying a 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 uses the specific verb 'Read' with a specific resource 'one message', and explicitly mentions payload and context refs, clearly distinguishing it from bus_inbox (likely a list) or bus_status. This is precise and leaves no ambiguity about the tool's core action.

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 implies the tool is for reading a full message when payload and context refs are needed, but it never names siblings or states when to prefer bus_read over bus_inbox/bus_thread. No exclusions or conditions are provided, so usage context must be inferred.

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