oc_output_fetch

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses pagination modes (item-based vs byte-range), defaults for offset/limit, and termination indicators (eof, next_offset). It does not cover error conditions like invalid handles, but provides sufficient behavioral context.

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 concise at three sentences, front-loading the purpose. Every sentence adds value without 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?

Given the tool's complexity (pagination with two modes) and the absence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the return behavior (eof, next_offset). It could mention error handling, but the essential information is present.

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%, but the description adds value beyond the schema by explaining default values (200 items, 65536 bytes), the 'auto' format behavior, and the meaning of eof and next_offset. This helps the agent understand parameter effects.

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 purpose: 'Redeem an output handle returned by a large-output tool...' It specifies the verb 'Redeem' and the resource 'output handle', and distinguishes it from sibling tools by mentioning the specific tools that produce output handles (read_page, crawl, etc.).

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 when to use the tool: after a large-output tool returns an output handle. It does not explicitly say when not to use, but the context is clear. It does not list alternative tools, but the purpose is specific enough.

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