snipara_read

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

Description states it's a 'read-only VIEWER operation and changes no project state', which aligns with and adds context to annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint). Also specifies return behavior (resolved range and text, or errors).

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?

Three concise sentences with no waste. The first sentence states purpose, the second provides usage context, and the third describes output. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 moderate complexity (3 optional params, no output schema), the description covers purpose, usage context, parameter details, and return behavior (including errors). Annotations cover safety, and the description fills in behavioral details.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds value by explaining defaults (end_line defaults to start_line + 50), the relative/global nature of start_line, and accepted aliases for file_path (file, path, document).

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 'Read an exact line range from indexed project documentation', specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by mentioning alternatives like snipara_get_chunk and context after snipara_search or snipara_context_query.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: use after snipara_search or snipara_context_query when exact wording matters, and use snipara_get_chunk when you already have a cited chunk ID. This clearly indicates when to and when not to use the tool.

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