read_pdf

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions text extraction and optional page range, but omits important details like handling of scanned documents, encrypted files, file not found errors, or output format. This is insufficient for a read operation with no annotations.

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 concise sentences: first states the core purpose, second adds the optional page range. No redundant words, information is front-loaded and 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?

Given the lack of output schema, the description should clarify return value format (e.g., plain text) and behavior for invalid input (e.g., non-existent file). It is adequate for simple use but misses details that could prevent agent errors.

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 100% with detailed parameter descriptions. The description's mention of page range restates the schema's example without adding new meaning. Since the schema already handles semantics, the description adds minimal value, earning a baseline 3.

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 'Extract text content from a PDF file', identifying the verb 'extract' and resource 'text content'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that create, merge, split, or update PDFs.

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 indicates optional page range usage, which helps the agent decide to provide a range. Although it doesn't explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, the sibling tools cover different operations, making the intended use obvious.

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