read_section

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

No annotations provided, so description must bear full weight. It explains what is returned (heading + body) and the effect of include_subsections, but does not mention error behavior (e.g., missing section) or confirm read-only nature.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no fluff. Every sentence adds useful information.

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 main usage and return content for a simple read tool, but lacks details on error handling and output format, which would be helpful given no output schema.

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?

Adds significant value beyond schema: explains how to interpret the 'section' parameter (bare heading vs. heading-path) and the role of 'include_subsections', while schema already describes types.

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?

States a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('a single section of a note'), and distinguishes from siblings like 'read_notes' and 'get_outline' by emphasizing partial loading.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on addressing sections (bare heading vs. path) and the include_subsections option, but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or state when not to use.

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