willys_read_doc

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states the tool is deterministically limited to the docs/ folder, cannot read .env, sessions, or anything else on the computer, and is safe to call freely. This directly addresses security and side-effect concerns.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds relevant information: what it reads, its safety constraints, and the available documents. No unnecessary 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 simple read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers everything needed to invoke it correctly: the resource type, the exact paths, the safety boundary, and its role relative to other instructions. It is complete without needing to explain return format.

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 already documents the 'path' parameter with 100% coverage, but the description adds value by listing the exact available document paths (help/setup.md, help/security.md, etc.), giving the agent concrete valid values beyond the schema's generic 'relative to docs/' explanation.

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 a document that comes with the server (e.g., "help/setup.md"). It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly limiting scope to the server's docs/ folder and emphasizing it is safe to call freely, which sets it apart from tools like willys_fetch_url or willys_open_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 notes that the short instructions point here for details, implying this tool is used to retrieve expanded documentation when needed. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough: use this to read bundled docs, not for other file access.

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