cdl_read_all

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

The description adds the behavioral trait of reading 'every' correction and specifies the source file types, complementing the readOnlyHint annotation. It provides useful context without contradicting the annotation.

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 a single, direct sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized and 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?

For a simple read tool with a well-documented schema and an output schema, the description is complete. It clearly explains what the tool does and what input it expects.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameter descriptions, so the description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the baseline. The single parameter is well-documented in the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('every ASC CDL correction') and clearly identifies the file types (.ccc/.cdl). It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'cdl_read' by emphasizing 'every'.

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 usage for reading all corrections from a file but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool. Differentiation from 'cdl_read' is only implicit through the word 'every'.

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