get_file_context

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and description adds value with a safety warning about untrusted content. Behavior is well-documented beyond annotations.

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?

Description is concise, front-loaded with purpose, then usage guidelines, examples, and safety. Each sentence adds value, no fluff.

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 7 parameters and 0% schema coverage, the description provides good context but missing explanations for some parameters. Output schema exists so return values are not needed.

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 0%, so description needs to compensate. It explains patterns with examples and mentions dry_run, clipboard, but does not explain max_files, max_tokens, max_file_bytes, or repo_path. Key parameters are covered but not all.

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 files by glob pattern formatted for LLM consumption, and distinguishes it from reading files individually. It also works on any directory, no git required.

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?

Provides clear guidance to prefer this over reading files individually when needing 2+ files, and mentions clipboard option. Examples help but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools, which are different so not required.

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