get_decode_result

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and excels: it warns that no table is read if configuration is missing, that the table is only a snapshot if acquisition is running, that column names are variable, and that values are strings formatted according to data_format. It also discloses truncation semantics via max_events and event_count.

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 and dense, with the core purpose front-loaded, followed by prerequisites, then data-format caveats. Every sentence adds value, and no fluff or repetition exists.

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?

Despite having no output schema or annotations, the description fully equips an agent to call the tool correctly: it covers preconditions, variable column names, units, formatting, and truncation behavior. No critical gap remains.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does: 'bus' is explained as decode bus 1-4, and 'max_events' is described as returning only the first N events, with event_count always the total count before truncation.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Read the decoded event table of a decode bus (bus 1-4).' It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like configure_decode and stop, and the bus range adds precise scope.

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 explicitly states prerequisites: call configure_decode with enabled=true and event_table=true first, and stop acquisition before reading. It also explains the consequence of not following these steps, leaving no doubt about when and how to use the tool.

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