read

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

The description adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotations: reads are batched ('together'), and results contain 'Facts, opaque write versions, and capacity signals.' The annotations already cover read-only and idempotent safety, so the description enhances rather than repeats them.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the most critical usage guidance, followed by return-content context. Every sentence earns its place and there is no redundant restating of the schema or annotations.

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?

With a rich output schema, detailed annotations, and a single well-documented parameter, the description covers the essential decisions: when to call, how to call, and what to expect. The only minor gap is that 'Page Snapshots' is not expanded, but it is likely domain-standard enough for the intended agent.

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 already describes the 'paths' parameter with 100% coverage, including uniqueness and canonical path requirements. The description adds only a mild batch-hint with 'together,' so it does not significantly expand parameter semantics beyond the schema baseline.

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 states a clear verb+resource action: 'Read unique canonical paths together.' It also clarifies what returned files contain. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling 'list', so the agent must infer the distinction between reading specific paths and listing the catalog.

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?

'Use before mutation unless current Page Snapshots are already available' gives explicit when-to-use guidance and names the condition under which it can be skipped. It does not explicitly state when alternatives like list should be preferred, but the usage context is clear.

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