Read File

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the SQLite index refresh side effect and explaining why it matters for later classification and parent suggestions. It also explicitly states 'It never changes the file,' clarifying the non-destructive nature despite readOnlyHint being false.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: the action and return value are front-loaded, the write_file use case is stated, and the side effect is disclosed without redundancy. The description is compact yet information-dense.

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 one-parameter read operation with no output schema, the description is complete: it lists all returned content fields, states the side effect, and confirms file immutability. An agent has enough information to invoke the tool correctly and interpret its result.

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 already provides a complete description of the single path parameter with an example, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds context about Markdown notes and the local knowledge base, but no additional parameter-level semantics are needed.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Read one Markdown note from the local knowledge base.' It also enumerates the returned components (note body, YAML frontmatter, hierarchy metadata, parent links, tags, warnings), making the tool's function concrete and distinct from siblings like list_files or write_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?

Explicitly says to use this tool 'before write_file when you need to preserve existing content or inspect current metadata,' giving clear situational guidance. It does not cover alternatives like get_parents or suggest_metadata, but the primary routing to write_file is well defined.

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