Read a MEGA text or PDF file

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses caps (MEGA_MAX_READ_BYTES, MEGA_MAX_PDF_BYTES), PDF extraction, and binary rejection. Additional transparency on error handling or permissions would improve.

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 wasted words. Front-loaded with action and resource. Efficiently covers purpose, constraints, and parameter usage.

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 no output schema, description mentions return of text contents. Covers caps and rejections. Missing details on error responses, but overall adequate for a read tool.

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 describes all 3 parameters (100% coverage). Description adds meaning by explaining how path and link relate, and notes maxBytes as an override. Adds value beyond 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 downloads and returns text contents, extracts PDFs, and requires a path or link. It distinguishes from sibling tools like mega_browse and mega_search.

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 when to use (for text/PDF files) and what is rejected (binary files). It does not explicitly name alternatives but implies context.

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