engine_html_load

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a safe read operation and warns that save overwrites, which is useful context. However, it does not explicitly state side effects, permissions, or return behavior.

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?

Two short sentences deliver the essential information with no filler. The path pattern is front-loaded, and the warning is a distinct, useful second sentence.

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 one-parameter load tool, the path template and read-before-edit warning are largely sufficient. The main gap is that no output format or return value is described, though 'load' implies returning the file content.

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 only defines 'path' as a string, but the description adds a meaningful path template: templates/<t>/units/<module>/main.htm. This helps agents construct valid paths despite 0% schema description coverage.

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 names a specific verb and resource: 'Load a template view .htm' and gives a concrete file pattern. It is clear what the tool operates on, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling loaders like engine_static_load or engine_whole_load.

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?

'Read before editing - save overwrites.' provides a clear usage context: this tool should be used to read content before making edits. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion conditions, but the guidance is actionable.

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