Read page text

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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent/open-world safety, but the description adds genuine behavioral context beyond them: it works on a background tab, includes scrolled-out content, and returns long pages in chunks with a stated stop point. The trailing 'Read-only' merely restates readOnlyHint, keeping this short of a 5.

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?

Front-loads what is read, then format, then usage/alternatives, then background-tab and chunking behavior. Every clause earns its place with no filler.

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 full-coverage, fully-annotated read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, alternative routing, return shape (chunking + offset continuation) and safe concurrent use (background tab). Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100% and all six parameters are documented in-schema, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only reinforces offset-based continuation, adding no syntax or semantics beyond what the schema already states, which is the baseline 3.

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?

States a specific verb (read) plus resource (the page text in one of the agent's tabs) and even the output format (headings with #, paragraphs, lists, table text in reading order). It explicitly distinguishes itself from browser_snapshot, so an agent can route without opening either schema.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use cases (read an article, results or documentation) and names the alternative with its own use case (browser_snapshot to find something to click). The selection condition between the two read-oriented siblings is unambiguous.

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