Read resource

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'progressively read' and modes but does not disclose details about return format, how budgetTokens affects output, whether partial reads have side effects, or any permissions/rate limits. The behavioral traits are only superficially hinted at.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose and enumerates the main modes. Every word contributes, with no filler or repetition.

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?

For a tool with 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It omits critical information about how the modes work, what the response contains, how budgetTokens influences behavior, and any prerequisites. The tool is more complex than the description addresses.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains the 'mode' parameter by listing snippet, line range, and full content, and 'line range' loosely implies startLine/endLine. However, it does not clarify 'uri' or 'budgetTokens', leaving most parameters semantically underdefined.

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's function: progressively reading a TokenHub resource. It specifies the resource type (TokenHub resource) and the available methods (snippet, line range, full content), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like discover_capabilities or run_workflow.

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 resources, especially large ones, but does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. The phrase 'progressively read' suggests incremental reading but lacks explicit guidance on selecting modes or comparing with sibling tools.

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