sassy_untar

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Extract' without detailing side effects like overwriting behavior, the role of the destination parameter, permission requirements, or error handling. This is insufficient for a tool that writes to the filesystem.

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 sentence with no filler, front-loading the core action immediately. It is extremely concise and every word earns its place, though this brevity comes at the cost of detail.

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?

For a tool with two parameters, no annotations, and no output schema details provided, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain the destination's behavior, return values, error conditions, or any constraints. This falls short of a minimum viable definition for an extraction 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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage for its two parameters, and the description adds no semantic meaning. It does not explain what 'archive' or 'destination' mean, their expected formats, or how they interact. The agent gets no useful parameter guidance beyond the raw parameter names.

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 function with the specific verb 'Extract' and a precise scope of supported archive formats ('tar/tar.gz/tar.bz2/tar.xz'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like sassy_unzip (which handles zip) and sassy_tar (likely for creating archives), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool over sassy_unzip or other extraction tools, nor does it state prerequisites, exclusions, or typical scenarios. It simply declares the action without context.

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