read_lines

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

Adds useful behavioral details (1-based line numbering, end=0 means to end of file), but could explicitly state the operation is read-only (no side effects). Since annotations are missing, the description adequately covers safety implicitly.

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 plus an Args list—no wasted words. Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence.

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?

Covers input parameters fully and provides usage context. Output format is not described, but an output schema exists (not shown) which presumably handles that. Minor gap: no mention that lines are returned as an array.

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%, but the description provides detailed explanations for all three parameters (path, start, end), including semantics for start (1-based) and end (inclusive, 0 for end). This fully compensates for missing schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states the tool reads a slice of lines from a text file, and explicitly distinguishes it from the sibling tool read_file by noting it handles files too large for read_file.

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?

Explicitly names the alternative (read_file) and specifies when to use this tool (for large files) versus the alternative.

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