opspilot_read_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral transparency. It discloses the allowlisting restriction and remote context, but does not state read-only guarantees, authentication needs, or error behaviors.

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 a single sentence with no filler or repetition. It is appropriately sized for the simple read operation, though it sacrifices detail for brevity.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, leaving the description as the only source of context. It does not explain what the tool returns, how catalog-allowlisted is enforced, or what constitutes a valid host_alias/path, making it insufficient for fully autonomous use.

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 schema has two required parameters with no descriptions, and the description provides no information about host_alias or path. The parameter names are self-explanatory, so semantics must be inferred from the names 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 tool reads a remote file with an additional catalog-allowlist constraint. It distinguishes from sibling write/upload tools via the verb 'read' and the qualifier 'catalog-allowlisted'.

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 a clear context for reading files but does not mention when to use it over alternatives like write_file or upload_file. There are no explicit exclusions or references to sibling tools, so guidance is implied rather than stated.

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