fsuipc_read_offset

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

As a read operation, the description is adequate. It does not contradict the tool's read-only nature, but it lacks explicit disclosure about side effects, permissions, or safety. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, but it minimally meets expectations.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and critical details. No redundant or excessive text. 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's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter formats, and special string handling. It does not explain error behavior or what a raw offset means, but it is sufficient for basic 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%, and the description adds high value by explaining offset_hex format ('0x0560'), listing type_code options (b, B, h, H, d, u, l, L, f, s), and clarifying that strings require type_code 's' and a length parameter. This is essential beyond the raw schema.

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 it reads a raw FSUIPC offset, with specific verb and resource. It provides examples for offset_hex format and type_code options. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like fsuipc_read_known, though 'raw' implies a distinction.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It explains string usage but does not mention prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is preferred over siblings like fsuipc_read_known or memory_read.

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