memory.read

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action without explaining side effects, safety, error conditions, or what 'the view' refers to. Critical details about address validity or return behavior are omitted.

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 overly brief—one short sentence. While concise, it sacrifices necessary detail. A well-structured description would front-load the purpose but include minimal essential guidance.

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 tool has 3 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotation, the description must provide comprehensive context. It fails to specify what 'the view' is, how addresses work, or what the tool returns, making it nearly unusable for an AI agent.

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%, yet the description adds no meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain the three required parameters (session_id, address, length), their format, or semantics. An agent cannot infer what 'address' types or 'session_id' means from this text.

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 'Read bytes from the view' uses a specific verb (read) and resource (bytes from the view), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like memory.write (write) and memory.insert (insert).

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 like memory.reader_read or memory.write. There is no mention of context, preconditions, or exclusions.

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