decodes

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

No annotations provided, but the description fully discloses behavior: read returns most recent N, drain advances cursor (each decode returned once), clear_local does not touch WSJT-X, replay re-broadcasts with New=false. All behaviors are clearly explained.

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 well-structured: summary line, operations section, decode fields. It is front-loaded with essential info. Slightly verbose but every sentence adds value.

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 2 params, no output schema, and no annotations, the description thoroughly covers all operations, decode fields, and even mentions the `seq` field for use with the 'reply' tool. Complete for agent usage.

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 0%, so description compensates. It explains the 'limit' parameter (default 50, most recent N) and implicitly maps operations to values (read, drain, clear_local, replay) from the description. Explicit naming of operation values would improve clarity.

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 reads RX data plane decodes, listing specific operations (read, drain, clear_local, replay) and what each decode carries. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'status' or 'log'.

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 gives explicit usage for each operation: read for recent N, drain for polling, clear_local to empty buffer, replay for backfill on connect. It mentions safety of replay. However, it doesn't explicitly say when NOT to use this tool or compare to alternatives.

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