Read a file from iCloud Drive as UTF-8 text, using local copies when available and supporting offset paging for large files.
Read a file as UTF-8 text (lossy for binary). Capped per call; page with offset. Local copy first.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes | ||
| offset | No | ||
| max_bytes | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose meaningful traits — UTF-8 decoding, lossiness on binary, a per-call cap (truncation) with offset paging — but 'Local copy first' is opaque and it never says whether truncation is signalled, what happens on a missing file, or permissions required.
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?
Extremely terse and front-loaded, with the core purpose in the first fragment. 'Local copy first' is cryptic rather than wasteful, but the compressed fragment style doesn't hurt selection.
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?
An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and the description covers encoding, capping, and paging. Still incomplete for a read operation: no error behavior, no explanation of the caching claim, and no guidance on detecting a truncated result.
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% across 3 parameters, so the description must compensate. It clarifies 'offset' (paging) and 'max_bytes' (the per-call cap) but leaves 'path' unexplained and gives no formats, units, or defaults.
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?
States a specific verb+resource ('Read a file as UTF-8 text') with a useful qualifier about decoding fidelity. It doesn't explicitly name or contrast the nearest sibling (icloud_download), though 'lossy for binary' implicitly steers binary content away from this tool.
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?
'lossy for binary' hints at when not to use it and 'page with offset' gives the paging method, but no alternative tool is named and there are no explicit preconditions. Usage is implied rather than stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.