read_last_build_errors

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly says 'Read', implying a non-mutating operation, and 'bounded' suggests a line limit. However, it does not disclose what happens when the file has fewer lines, or what the exact output format is, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the action, resource, and context without any filler or redundancy.

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?

Given the simple one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description provides the basic purpose and use case. However, it omits an explicit explanation of the max_lines parameter and the nature of the 'bounded portion', leaving minor gaps for a new 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 schema has 0% description coverage and no parameter descriptions. The description's use of 'bounded portion' hints at the max_lines parameter, but it does not explicitly name it or explain how it affects the result, requiring the agent to infer the connection.

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 'Read' and the resource 'ExileAPI's Errors.txt', with a specific temporal context 'after an in-game build'. This distinguishes it from the snapshot-related sibling tools, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 phrase 'after an in-game build' provides a clear trigger for when to use this tool, which serves as a usage context. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, so it lacks exclusion phrasing.

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