read_orientation

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

The description fully discloses that the tool only reads files, with no side effects or destructive operations. This transparency is sufficient given no annotations are present.

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, tight sentence that conveys all necessary information without any fluff. Every word adds value.

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?

The description explains the tool's action and purpose but does not mention the return format or structure. Since it reads specific files, the output is implied, but a brief note about the return could enhance completeness.

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?

There are no parameters, so there is nothing to explain. The description correctly omits parameter details, and the schema coverage is vacuously complete.

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 verb (Reads) and the specific resources (SCHEMA.md, index.md, log.md), leaving no ambiguity about the tool's function. It also includes the purpose 'for instant agent orientation', which adds context.

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 when to use it ('for instant agent orientation') but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools. However, since the siblings (search_wiki, get_page) serve different purposes, the usage context is clear enough.

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