get_file

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly/ idempotent behavior. Description adds key behavioral details: truncation of files over 500 lines, line range slicing, and match filtering with context lines. No contradictions with 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 sentences, front-loaded with primary purpose and features, then usage guidance. Every sentence carries essential information with no redundancy.

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?

With 7 parameters and no output schema, description adequately covers core functionality, truncation, match filtering, and usage context. Could be slightly more detailed on response structure (e.g., metadata), but sufficient for an agent.

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% so baseline is 3. Description adds value by explaining how parameters work together (e.g., truncation avoidance via range/match) and mentions line numbers in output, which is not in schema.

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?

Clearly states 'Read file content from one file in a GitHub repository', specifying verb and resource. Distinguishes from siblings by advising to use after search_code, find_symbol, or repo_tree, making its unique role explicit.

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?

Provides explicit context for when to use ('after locating a file via search_code, find_symbol, or repo_tree') and mentions truncation behavior that guides usage. Lacks explicit 'do not use' scenarios, but the context is clear.

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