read_paragraphs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden: it clearly frames this as a read operation, discloses the pagination behavior, and states the return shape (total count plus requested slice). It does not cover permissions or error behavior, but for a read-only listing tool the key behavioral traits are present.

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 short sentences with zero waste. The pagination mechanism and return shape are front-loaded in a logical order.

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 3-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential behavior: what is returned (total count plus slice) and how pagination works. It leaves minor gaps around documentId optionality and style formatting, but those are largely covered by the schema or not critical for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents offset, limit, defaults, and maximums in detail. The description mentions offset/limit pagination but adds no syntax or format meaning beyond what the schema provides; 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 states a specific verb+resource (read paragraphs of the document) and adds scope details: styles included, paginated with offset/limit. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like get_paragraph or search_document.

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?

Pagination is mentioned, which implies the tool is for retrieving a slice of paragraphs, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus get_paragraph (single paragraph) or search_document (filtered search). Usage is only implied.

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