mcquest_read_file

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

The description leads with 'READ ONLY', disclosing the operation's safety profile in the absence of annotations. It also states the output format and advises range usage, giving useful behavioral context beyond the bare schema.

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, front-loaded with the most important signal ('READ ONLY'), and gives practical advice. Minor redundancy exists between 'exact line numbers' and 'returns line-numbered content', but overall there is no padding.

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 that the tool has only three simple parameters and an output schema, the description covers the key points: what to read, the line-range preference, and token efficiency. It is slightly thin on default behavior, but not critically incomplete.

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%, and the description only indirectly references line ranges. It does not explain how `start_line` and `end_line` behave, whether the range is inclusive, how `path` is resolved, or what the defaults imply.

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 states a specific verb-resource action: read a source file. It also clarifies the output ('line-numbered content') and distinguishes this from doc-reading and search tools by specifying 'source 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?

It gives explicit operational guidance: use line ranges instead of full files to reduce token consumption. It doesn't explicitly name sibling alternatives or exclusions, but 'source file' clearly frames the intended use.

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