read_file_segment

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

No annotations are provided, and the description is too brief. It does not disclose important behavioral traits such as whether the tool is read-only (assumed but not stated), how it handles out-of-range lines, or file encoding. The description carries the full burden but falls short.

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?

A single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the essential purpose.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description should provide more context about the return format, error handling, and file path convention. The schema hints at repo-relative path, but the description does not. The tool is simple, but the description is thin for a tool with no auxiliary metadata.

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 provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all three parameters. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb (read), resource (file line range), and scope (specific line range), distinguishing it from sibling tools like read_file which reads entire files.

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 purpose implies use when only a segment of a file is needed, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use or when to avoid (e.g., for full file, use read_file). No alternatives mentioned.

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