tor_read_page

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations by mentioning 'bounded amount' and 'untrusted markdown', which informs the agent about the limited read scope and the need to treat content as potentially unreliable.

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 a single concise sentence with no redundant words. It is front-loaded with the verb 'Read' and conveys all necessary information efficiently.

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?

For a simple read tool with one optional parameter, readOnly annotations, and an output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers the action, resource, bounded nature, and output format, while annotations handle safety and schema handles return structure.

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 one param, max_chars, with no description (0% coverage). The description's phrase 'bounded amount' relates to the concept of max_chars but does not explicitly name or explain the parameter. Since the parameter name is self-explanatory and optional, this is adequate but does not fully compensate for the lack of schema description.

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 uses a specific verb 'Read' with a clear resource 'the current page' and specifies the output format as 'untrusted markdown'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like tor_get_page_info or tor_screenshot, which serve different functions.

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 implies the tool is for reading current page content as markdown, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or mention any when-not scenarios. Usage is inferred rather than explicitly guided.

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