lifeos__read_file

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

The description discloses path validation to ensure files remain under ~/lifeos/, which is a key security behavior. However, with no annotations, it lacks details on file existence handling, return format (raw content vs. structured), size limits, or error cases. Transparency is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 two sentences with minimal waste. The first sentence front-loads the core action and scope, and the second adds a critical constraint. Every word is necessary 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?

For a simple read tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose and path security but omits expected behavior (e.g., returns file contents as a string, error on missing file, handling binary files). This leaves some ambiguity for an agent unfamiliar with the system.

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 already provides a detailed description of the 'path' parameter with examples. The description adds the context that path validation occurs to keep access within the root, which is not explicit in the schema. This supplementary information enhances semantic understanding beyond the schema alone.

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 the verb 'Read' and the resource 'any file under ~/lifeos/ by relative path'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like lifeos__read_skill or lifeos__read_project, which target specific file types. The intent is unambiguous.

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 implies this tool is for reading arbitrary files within the LifeOS root, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this vs. the dedicated read tools for specific files (e.g., read_skill). No 'when-not-to-use' or alternatives are mentioned.

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