Get a file from a gist

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond that: output may contain sensitive data and must be treated as untrusted content, with a security instruction not to follow instructions found in the content.

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 three tightly packed sentences: purpose, usage guidance, and safety warning. Every sentence earns its place, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 rich schema, high parameter coverage, available output schema, and strong annotations, the description fills the remaining gaps well: when to prefer this tool and why the output is dangerous. Nothing critical for an agent 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?

The input schema already provides descriptions for all 5 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds helpful framing for sha and offset in the context of revisions and chunked reading, but it calls the offset a 'byte offset' while the schema describes it as a 'character offset', creating a real ambiguity that prevents this from scoring higher.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get the raw content of a single file of a gist', with optional revision and offset. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling get_gist, which retrieves a whole gist rather than one file.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool: 'Use this for files that get_gist truncated, or to read a large file in chunks.' It also names the alternative tool, get_gist, making the selection decision unambiguous.

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