read_multiple_files

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention behavior on missing files, partial failures, return format, size limits, or any side effects, which is a notable gap for a batch operation.

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, direct sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

While the tool has one simple parameter and no output schema, the description lacks information about return format or error handling, which is relevant for a batch operation. It is minimally viable but leaves some ambiguity about what the response looks like.

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 input schema has full 100% coverage for the single 'paths' parameter, so the description does not need to add much. The description's 'multiple files' aligns with the schema's 'Array of file paths', but adds no extra semantic detail beyond what the schema already conveys.

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 the contents of multiple files in one request, distinguishing it from the sibling read_file tool by the 'multiple files' and 'single request' qualifiers.

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 usage for batch reading via 'multiple files in a single request', but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over read_file or exclude scenarios like needing single file reads. No alternatives are named.

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