Normalize ASN.1 Input

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions input formats and output as re-encoded bytes, but lacks details on output format (e.g., DER vs. hex, per encoding param), error handling, or validation behavior.

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?

Single sentence, no waste, directly states the operation and supported input formats.

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?

No output schema; description says 'return round-trip re-encoded ASN.1 bytes' but does not specify output format (e.g., DER) or handle error cases, leaving ambiguity for the 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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented via schema descriptions. The tool description adds no further parameter-specific meaning beyond the overall purpose.

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 decodes multiple ASN.1 formats (DER, BER, PEM, HEX, base64) and returns re-encoded bytes, distinguishing it from sibling tools like parse_asn1 or extract_asn1_node.

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 use for normalization/format conversion but does not explicitly state when to use or avoid this tool, nor does it reference alternatives.

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