anylogic_read

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'Lee' conveys a read-only operation, and it usefully discloses heading partial-matching and max_chars truncation behavior. It does not mention what happens on an unknown path (error vs empty) or result pagination, which for an unannotated tool is a gap.

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?

One-sentence purpose is front-loaded, followed by a compact per-argument list. No filler. The Args block is standard and each line earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is unnecessary, and all three parameters are documented in prose. For a simple read tool this is nearly complete; only edge-case behavior (missing path, heading not found) is left unstated.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does document all three parameters with meaning beyond the schema: path format with concrete examples, heading as a partial-match section filter, and max_chars as an output truncation cap. It omits the max_chars default (12000) and valid ranges, keeping it from a 5.

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+resource: 'Lee una página o una sección concreta del corpus.' Clear what it does and that it operates on a path within the corpus. It distinguishes itself implicitly from anylogic_search by referencing the paths that search returns, but never names siblings explicitly.

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?

'path: ruta relativa devuelta por anylogic_search' implies the workflow (search first, then read). However, there is no explicit 'use this when' guidance and no differentiation from anylogic_api, anylogic_examples, or anylogic_toc for similar content retrieval.

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