read_heu_document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full burden. It discloses that the tool downloads a PDF, extracts text, does not save to disk, and defaults to all pages up to 100. However, it does not mention idempotency, side effects, authentication, or rate limits. The behavioral disclosure is decent but incomplete.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main action and use cases. Every sentence adds information without redundancy. It is highly concise and well-structured.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should explain return format. It states text is returned in the response but does not specify format (plain text, structured, etc.). It also omits error handling (e.g., document not found). For a read tool with 5 parameters, the description covers primary use but lacks completeness in edge cases and output details.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so each parameter is already explained. The description adds value by clarifying the default page range and suggesting the 'pages' parameter for longer documents. This is a minor addition; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 reads textual content of a HEU document without saving to disk, and lists specific use cases (summarizing, searching clauses, comparing contracts). This distinguishes it from siblings like read_pdf_document (generic PDF) and download_heu_document_pdf (downloads 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 provides context ('utile per riassumere, cercare clausole, confrontare contratti') but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives. It lacks exclusions or comparisons to siblings, which would help an agent decide between similar tools.

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