get_file_text

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

With no annotations, the description discloses UTF-8 decoding and raw bytes for binary, but does not mention truncation behavior when max_bytes is exceeded, error handling, or authentication 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?

Two sentences, no redundancy, front-loaded with the core action. Every word 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?

No output schema, and the description omits return format details for binary files (whether raw bytes are returned as blob or base64). For a simple file download tool, it is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 descriptions are 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains max_bytes ('up to max_bytes') but not file_id format or acceptable values. Both parameters lack detailed semantic context.

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 downloads a Canvas file and returns its text up to max_bytes, decoding as UTF-8. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_file_metadata by focusing on file content.

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 specifies best use for plaintext and binary limitations, advising upstream extraction for binary formats. While it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools, the guidance on when not to use is clear.

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