data.typed_at

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states a read operation ('Get') but does not explain what happens on invalid addresses, whether the operation is safe, what types of data are returned, or any side effects. This is a critical 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?

While the single sentence is brief, it is under-specified rather than concise. It omits essential information that an agent needs, making it ineffective. Every word should earn its place, but this sentence fails to convey the tool's purpose or usage.

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 (2 required params, no output schema, numerous sibling tools), the description is woefully incomplete. It does not explain return values, parameter semantics, or how this tool relates to other data-access tools. An agent would be left guessing.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds no explanation for the 'address' parameter (integer/string meaning) or 'session_id'. The user cannot infer what values are valid or how they affect the tool's behavior.

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 'Get typed data variable at an address' uses a generic verb and resource, but 'typed data variable' is unclear and does not distinguish from sibling tools like 'value.reg', 'value.stack', or 'binary.data_vars'. It lacks specificity about what constitutes a typed data variable or how the address is interpreted.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'value.possible' or 'search.data'. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., an active session) or when to avoid using it. The description offers zero decision-making support.

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