read_mom6_params

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

The description discloses return format (KEY=VALUE pairs), override precedence (MOM_override marked with [override]), and basic usage. It does not mention error handling or non-existent files, but given the read-only nature, the transparency is good. No annotation contradiction (none provided).

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?

Three concise sentences front-load the purpose, then detail the return format and filtering. No wasted words; every sentence 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?

Given the low complexity (reading two files, returning key-value pairs) and the presence of an output schema (so no need to explain return structure), the description covers all essential aspects: files read, return format, filtering, and override precedence. It is complete for agent use.

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 coverage is 0%, so description bears the burden. It clearly explains the 'filter' parameter as a substring search with examples, and 'case_dir' is self-evident from context. This adds significant meaning beyond the 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 the tool reads MOM_input and MOM_override parameter files for CESM/MOM6 cases, returns KEY=VALUE pairs, and supports substring filtering. It distinguishes from sibling tools like diff_params (comparison) and find_errors (error detection).

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 provides clear context on what the tool does (read specific files) and how filtering works, but does not explicitly mention when to use it over alternatives or exclusions. The context is clear enough for selecting this tool for reading parameters.

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