mcquest_read_doc

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It clearly declares the read-only nature, exact line numbering, line-range recommendation, and the line-numbered Markdown output. It does not disclose error behavior or invalid-range handling, but the core behavior is transparent.

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 short and front-loaded with purpose and safety. Slight redundancy exists between 'READ ONLY' and 'Read' and between 'exact line numbers' and 'line-numbered', but overall each sentence adds useful information.

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 resource type, the presence of an output schema, and the small parameter set, the description covers the essential behaviors an agent needs to invoke the tool correctly. The main gap is not explaining how this differs from the closely related mcquest_read_file sibling.

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 schema has zero parameter descriptions, so the description must compensate. It does explain the meaning of line ranges, covering start_line and end_line reasonably, and 'path' is made obvious by 'Markdown documentation file'. Still, it leaves path details and edge-case semantics underspecified.

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 identifies a Markdown documentation file as the resource, and 'read' as the verb. It also adds the line-numbered output behavior, which helps distinguish it from plain file reads and the similar sibling mcquest_read_file.

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 gives concrete usage guidance: use line ranges instead of requesting huge files. However, it does not state when to prefer this over sibling tools like mcquest_read_file or when not to use it.

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