repack_trace

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

The description only states the action and compression formats, without elaborating on side effects such as file overwriting, output handling, or the meaning of the 'output' parameter. The annotations indicate non-read-only, but the description adds no further transparency.

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, clear sentence that directly conveys the tool's purpose. It is well-structured and free of unnecessary words, achieving high conciseness.

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?

While the description is concise, it lacks context on how to properly invoke the tool, including parameter meanings and expected outcomes. Given the absence of parameter descriptions, the agent may struggle to use it correctly.

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?

No parameter definitions are provided in the description; the schema lists parameters without explanations. The description mentions 'compression' but does not clarify the roles of trace, output, quality, or timeout.

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 clearly states the tool's primary function—repacking a trace with compression options—which is specific enough to distinguish from typical trace analysis tools. However, it lacks explicit mention of what 'repack' entails beyond compression, so it's slightly above average.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like trim_trace or sed_trace. It does not mention any conditions or comparisons, leaving the agent to infer usage from sibling names.

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