read_doc

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Mentions reading 'full text' but does not disclose behavioral traits such as being read-only, potential size limits (despite max_chars parameter), or error behavior. Minimal disclosure beyond basic function.

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 sentences: first states purpose, second gives usage context. No redundant words or fluff. Highly concise.

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?

Covers the essential usage flow (use after query_graph). Lacks discussion of error handling, authentication requirements, or file-not-found scenarios. With an output schema likely present, the return value is covered. Adequate for a simple read tool.

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 0%, yet the description does not explain any parameters (filename, max_chars). It does not clarify what filename must be or how max_chars affects output. The purpose implies filename is the file path, but no detail given.

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'), resource ('Gonka documentation file'), and how to identify it ('by filename'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_docs (listing) and query_graph (searching) by specifying its role after identification.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this after query_graph identifies a relevant file', providing strong contextual guidance. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the usage context is clear enough.

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