read_agent_docs

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

The description discloses the read operation and optional file inclusion. Although no annotations exist, it clearly communicates the non-destructive behavior and parameter effect. No side effects or permissions are mentioned, but it's adequate for a simple read.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words, effectively conveys the 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 simplicity (one boolean parameter, no output schema), the description is complete. An agent can understand what files are read and the optional nature of one file.

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 description only restates the optional parameter ('optionally REPO_UNDERSTANDING.md') without adding details beyond the schema's own description. With 100% schema coverage, this adds no meaningful value.

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 it reads specific files (AGENT.md and optionally REPO_UNDERSTANDING.md), with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools that handle other project assets.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternatives are provided. The context of sibling tools implies this is for reading documentation, but no clear guidance on when not to use it.

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