read_cells

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that pages param selects specific page dimensions, that viewId can default to moduleId, and implies a cell limit. However, it does not detail the return format or any rate limits, though the important behavioral constraints are covered.

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?

Four focused sentences: purpose, alternative usage hint, viewId clarification, and large data advice. No wasted words, perfectly front-loaded.

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 no output schema and the complexity of the tool (8 params, many sibling tools), the description covers key usage, alternatives, and constraints. It omits return value details but that is acceptable without an output schema. Feels complete for selecting and invoking correctly.

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 100% with descriptions for all 8 parameters. The description adds value beyond schema by explaining viewId can be a saved view or moduleId default, and that pages selects specific page dimensions. This supplements the schema well.

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?

Clearly states 'Read cell data from a module view' – specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling tools like run_export and create_view_readrequest through explicit usage guidance.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use read_cells vs alternatives: use run_export for reports across all products/customers (not in a loop), and use create_view_readrequest for >1M cells. Also clarifies viewId options.

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