Read File (Deprecated)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so description's 'read' is consistent. It adds that head/tail can limit lines, but no additional side effects, auth needs, or rate limits. Beyond annotations, adds moderate 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?

Two sentences: first states action, second delivers deprecation notice. Front-loaded, no redundant phrasing. Every sentence is useful.

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 tool is deprecated and has identical functionality as read_text_file (a sibling), the description covers purpose, deprecation, and alternative. Output schema exists (not shown), so no need to explain return values. Complete for its context.

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 description coverage is 67% (head and tail have descriptions, path lacks one). Description mentions 'complete contents' implying path is the file, but does not elaborate on other parameters beyond what schema already provides. Baseline mid-level due to partial 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?

Description states 'Read the complete contents of a file as text' with specific verb and resource. Explicitly notes deprecation and recommends 'read_text_file', distinguishing it from sibling tools.

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 indicates deprecation and directs to use 'read_text_file'. This is strong guidance, but does not cover other contexts where head/tail parameters might be used or call out alternatives for those cases.

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