get_object_preview

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the read-only nature and the max_bytes limit, but it does not explain what happens when max_bytes is exceeded (e.g., truncation) or how binary/non-text files are handled. This leaves some behavioral ambiguity.

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 and front-loaded with the main purpose. The parameter list is structured and each line adds value. No wasted words.

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?

The tool has an output schema and four parameters, but with no annotations, the description needs to provide more context. It covers the basics but omits details about output truncation, error cases, or behavior with unsupported file types. For an agent, it's adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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 schema has no property descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It explains each parameter: bucket name, key path, max_bytes with a default, and provider_id as optional. This adds meaningful semantics beyond the raw schema, though it could be more detailed (e.g., provider_id format).

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's purpose: 'Read the contents or preview of an S3 object.' This is a specific verb+resource statement. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like get_object_metadata by focusing on content preview rather than metadata.

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 useful context by noting it's 'Useful for text, JSON, CSV, or code files,' which helps an agent decide when to use it. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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