read_file

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

The description indicates a read-only operation (non-destructive), but it lacks details about handling of non-text files, error conditions, or any restrictions. Without annotations, the burden is higher, but the core behavior is transparent.

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, short sentence that quickly conveys the tool's purpose. It is appropriately front-loaded, but could be slightly improved by adding parameter context without becoming verbose.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the basic function but omits parameter format and return value details. It is minimally adequate but not fully complete.

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 description does not mention the 'path' parameter at all. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should add meaning (e.g., absolute vs relative, supported encodings), but it fails to do so.

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 that the tool reads and returns the text contents of a file. It uses a specific verb ('reads') and resource ('file'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'list_directory' and 'echo'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as file existence or permissions, nor when not to use it.

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