power_shell_read

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only states the basic action; the buffer-clearing behavior implied by the 'clear' parameter is not mentioned, nor is any indication of blocking, return values, or session state requirements.

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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the core action, and no wasted words. While it could be expanded for clarity, the current length is appropriate for a simple read operation.

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?

The tool lacks an output schema and annotations, so the description needs to explain more about return values and behavioral context. It doesn't mention that the session must already be open, what reading does to the buffer, or what the read output looks like, leaving significant gaps.

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?

Both parameters are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, earning the baseline of 3.

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 identifies the tool's action (read output) and target (PowerShell session). It is specific enough to distinguish from other read tools by naming PowerShell, though it doesn't contrast with power_shell_exec or other siblings.

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 vs alternatives like power_shell_exec or the other *_read siblings. Missing context on prerequisites (e.g., session must be open) and when a read is appropriate.

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