read_records

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

No annotations provided; description only indicates a read operation but does not mention permissions, rate limits, error handling, or behavior for missing IDs.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no filler words. Every sentence adds value.

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?

With 3 parameters (2 required), no schema descriptions, and an output schema present, the description is too brief. It lacks detail on return values, pagination, or differentiation from sibling tools.

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?

Only fields parameter is hinted ('Pass `fields` to limit columns'), but model and ids are not explained. Schema coverage is 0%, so description should compensate more.

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?

Description clearly states 'Fetch specific records by their ids' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from siblings like search_read by specifying fetching by IDs.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like search_read or get_model_fields. No exclusions or contexts provided.

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