head

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full weight. It discloses the directory restriction but lacks details on edge cases (e.g., n larger than file length), error handling, or performance. Basic behavior is covered, but not comprehensively.

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, front-loaded with the core action. Very concise, but the Dutch language may reduce readability for non-Dutch agents. No wasted words.

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 tool with only two parameters and an existing output schema, the description covers the primary function and a key constraint. It does not detail return format or errors, but those are likely covered by the 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?

Schema has no descriptions (0% coverage). The description explains what 'n' represents (number of lines) and implies 'path' is the file. This adds basic meaning but could be more explicit, especially for 'path'.

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 the first n lines of a file under allowed directories. It includes a key constraint (ALLOWED_READ_DIRS) and distinguishes itself from siblings like 'tail' or 'read_file' by specifying the head behavior.

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 when to use this tool (to view the beginning of a file) and mentions a restriction (only under ALLOWED_READ_DIRS). It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, but the context is clear for a simple file utility.

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