Read Large File by Line Range

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the behavior of reading a line range and the benefit of reducing memory and context. However, it does not mention error cases, inclusivity decisions (though schema covers it), or what the response contains, leaving some gaps.

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 short sentences that front-load the purpose and quickly explain the usage. No filler or redundant information, making it easy to parse.

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?

The description covers the essential purpose and usage pattern for a chunk-reading tool. Given the schema fully documents parameters and the tool is a simple read operation, it's reasonably complete. It could mention maxLines or response format, but those are less critical for this context.

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 100%, with each parameter described in the schema. The description highlights the role of startLine and endLine in fetching chunks, reinforcing the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Reads a specific line range from a large file' identifying the verb, resource, and scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like read_local_file which likely reads the entire file. The title also reinforces this.

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 explicitly instructs to use startLine and endLine to fetch only needed sections, implying its use case for large files to reduce memory and context. It doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives or list when not to use, but the guidance is clear enough for selection.

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