Read document index content

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

No annotations provided; description states read-only operation from cache but omits behavioral details like idempotency, side effects, or prerequisites (e.g., index must exist from doc_analyze).

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?

Single sentence conveys core purpose efficiently. Slightly front-loaded but could benefit from additional context without sacrificing 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?

Description is insufficient given six parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. Lacks explanation of how to combine parameters (e.g., indexId vs path) or what the return value includes.

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 coverage is low (33%), and description mentions only general element types (blocks, chunks, anchors) without clarifying parameter relationships or usage logic for the five non-described parameters.

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?

Description clearly states the tool reads blocks, chunks, or anchors from a cached index, distinguishing it from source document inspection. Verb 'Read' and specific resource 'cached index' are explicit.

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?

Description implies usage when a cached index is available ('without inspecting source internals'), but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance compared to siblings like doc_analyze or doc_search.

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