project_file_read

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

Description only gives basic behavior. With no annotations, it should disclose more: file types, encoding, size limits, permissions, side effects. Currently lacks this detail.

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?

One sentence is concise, but it sacrifices necessary details for a file read operation. Could add useful info without being verbose.

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?

Despite an output schema (unseen), the description doesn't explain return values (e.g., file content). Also missing error handling or encoding info, making it incomplete for a file tool.

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 0% and description adds no meaning to parameters. file_path and project_id are not explained (e.g., relative path? required format?).

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 action (Read) and the resource (text file inside project directory). It distinguishes from sibling tools like project_file_write and node_file_read by specifying the location.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., node_file_read for node files). No context on prerequisites or exclusions.

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