Read Multiple Files

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by disclosing key behaviors: failed reads for individual files won't stop the entire operation, and it only works within allowed directories. Annotations already mark it as read-only, and the description confirms a safe read operation while adding important fault-tolerance detail.

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 concise with three sentences, all serving a distinct purpose: stating the action, providing usage context, and noting behavioral traits. It is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 that an output schema exists, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers all essential aspects: the tool's function, efficiency benefit, failure handling, and constraints. This is complete for a tool with one parameter and read-only annotations.

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 input schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'paths', with a clear description in the schema itself. The tool description does not add new meaning to the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool reads multiple files simultaneously, using a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('contents of multiple files'). It distinguishes itself from reading files one by one, which is a sibling tool, by highlighting efficiency for analysis or comparison.

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 provides clear guidance on when to use this tool: when you need to analyze or compare multiple files, as it is more efficient. It also notes a constraint ('Only works within allowed directories'). It does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficient.

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