soul_read

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

The description indicates a read-only operation, which is transparent. Since no annotations are provided, the description effectively communicates the non-destructive nature of the tool.

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 extremely concise with only two sentences, no unnecessary words, and all information is front-loaded. It earns every character.

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 simple input schema (one required parameter) and no output schema, the description adequately covers the expected inputs. However, it does not specify the return format or what the output might look like.

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?

The description adds significant value beyond the schema by enumerating the valid file names (e.g., SOUL.md, SHADOW.md). This enriches the schema's minimal example and helps the agent select correct parameter values.

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 a soul file and lists the available files. It uses a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like soul_write and soul_reflect.

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 implies usage for reading specific files but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like soul_context or soul_status. No exclusions or when-not guidance is provided.

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