pty_read

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: ANSI escapes are stripped by default and all: true returns buffered output. It stops short of explaining truncation, blocking behavior, or error cases.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence states the core action, and the parenthetical efficiently covers the all option. There is no filler or redundancy.

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?

With no output schema, the description should convey return semantics. It indicates that terminal text is returned with ANSI stripped by default, but omits maxChars truncation/default behavior and does not fully explain raw or id. Annotations cover safety, but parameter and return gaps remain for a four-parameter read tool.

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% for four parameters, so the description must carry the burden. It explicitly explains all: true and indirectly hints at raw behavior via 'ANSI escapes are stripped by default', but id and maxChars are undocumented in both the schema and the description.

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?

States a specific verb 'Read' and resource 'terminal output from a PTY session', and distinguishes scope via 'new' versus 'all buffered output'. This clearly separates it from sibling operations like pty_write and pty_list, even without naming process_output.

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 usage after starting or writing to a PTY and gives parameter-level guidance for all: true, but it does not state when to choose pty_read over process_output, job_output, or other read tools, nor does it provide any exclusions.

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