run_read

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the output is Markdown, but says nothing about read-only guarantees, error behavior, permissions, rate limits, or side effects. 'Чтения' implies a read, but this is not explicit.

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 very short and the second sentence about Markdown output provides useful information. However, the first sentence merely restates the tool name, so part of the text is redundant. It is concise but under-specified.

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 0% schema coverage and no annotations, this description is far from complete. It does not explain how to select a value for 'name', what read actions exist, or what 'params' should contain. The output schema exists but cannot compensate for missing invocation guidance.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description does not mention the parameters 'name' or 'params' at all. It fails to explain what 'name' refers to, what valid values exist, or how 'params' should be structured, adding zero semantic value beyond the bare schema names.

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 phrase 'Выполнить действие чтения' is essentially a restatement of the tool name 'run_read', not a specific verb+resource description. It adds that output is Markdown, but does not clarify what read action, resource, or domain it operates on, leaving the purpose vague.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like search_actions or describe_action. The description does not mention any prerequisites, alternatives, or selection criteria, so the agent gets no help deciding when run_read is appropriate.

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