Read File

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations by mentioning supported formats (PDF, DOCX, PPTX, plain text) and the truncation behavior, which is not captured in the structured metadata.

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 three sentences long, front-loaded with the main action, and contains no redundant information. Every sentence contributes to understanding the tool's purpose, supported formats, and parameter behavior.

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 tool's simplicity, the presence of an output schema, and rich annotations, the description fully covers usage context. It explains prerequisites, supported file types, and parameter semantics, leaving no significant gaps for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 both parameters already described. The description adds extra meaning by clarifying that file_id comes from list_files or course_content, and that max_chars truncates long files, going beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 verb 'Download' and the resource 'Canvas file', specifying that it returns text content. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_files (which lists files without content) and get_page (which reads pages) by mentioning it retrieves file text and supports specific formats.

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 explicit guidance on obtaining file IDs ('Get file ids from list_files or course_content') and mentions the max_chars truncation parameter. While it doesn't explicitly compare to alternative tools, the context makes the tool's purpose clear, and the prerequisite steps are noted.

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