Spy Read Code

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only hints that the output is generated Python; it does not say whether the operation is read-only, whether a project must be open, whether a file is required, or what happens when the file parameter is empty.

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 very short, but this is severe under-specification, not effective conciseness. The sentence structure is confusing and fails to communicate the intended function clearly.

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?

Even though there is an output schema, the input param is undocumented, the description gives no operational context, and the relationship to sibling tools is absent. An agent has no reliable basis to invoke this tool correctly.

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 input schema has one param, file, with no schema description (0% coverage), and the tool description never mentions it. An agent is left completely in the dark about what to pass, whether it is required, and what the default '' means.

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 is a grammatically garbled noun phrase: 'The Python a tab's blocks generate.' It likely means 'read the Python code generated from a tab's blocks,' but there is no clear verb or explicit statement of what the tool does. It does not adequately distinguish itself from spies like spy_read_blocks or spy_write_python.

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 related tools such as spy_read_blocks, spy_write_python, or project_list_assets. The description vaguely implies generated Python code is involved, but never states conditions, prerequisites, or alternatives.

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