sandbox_file_read

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

With no annotations provided, the description's minimal content places burden on the agent. It states 'read' (non-destructive) but lacks details on encoding, binary handling, or error behavior (e.g., file not found).

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?

Description is a single sentence with no waste. It is 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 the lack of annotations and output schema, the description should provide more context about return format (e.g., text, JSON) or limitations (e.g., file size). The sibling tools reveal a rich sandbox ecosystem, so an agent may need guidance on when to use this vs. other file tools.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with clear descriptions. The tool description adds no additional semantics beyond stating 'file in a sandbox.' The schema already defines sandboxId and path precisely, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the contents of a file in a sandbox,' specifying the verb (Read) and resource (file in a sandbox). It distinguishes from sibling tools like sandbox_file_write (writing) and sandbox_file_info (metadata).

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 provides no context about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention file types, size limits, or contrast with sandbox_get_url (which reads URLs instead of local files).

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