reading_import_begin

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

The description lacks disclosure of behavioral traits such as side effects, return values, or required subsequent steps (e.g., reading_import_part, reading_import_finish). Annotations only provide a title, so the description carries the full burden but fails to add meaningful behavioral context.

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 very short (two sentences), which is concise, but it sacrifices completeness. For a tool with many parameters and a multi-step process, a bit more detail would be warranted without becoming overly verbose.

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?

Given the complex chunked import flow (with siblings like reading_import_part, reading_import_finish, reading_import_cancel) and no output schema, the description should provide more context about the overall import process and what to expect after calling this tool. It currently lacks this contextual completeness.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 10 parameters, the description adds no meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain any parameter's role or constraints.

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 verb ('start') and resource ('chunked EPUB/TXT import'), and explicitly distinguishes it from the sibling 'reading_import_book' by noting the use case for large files.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when the file is too large for one reading_import_book request,' providing clear guidance on when to use this tool versus an alternative.

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