ReadFiles

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

Annotations already set readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds valuable behavioral context: absolute paths required, tilde allowed, and optional line range extraction. No contradictions.

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 structured as a clear bullet list, front-loading the main purpose. The third bullet about line numbers is necessary but adds some length; overall efficient.

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 no output schema and a simple file reading operation, the description covers essential information: file paths input, line range option, and path conventions. No gaps for typical use.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining the 'file_paths' parameter: absolute paths only, tilde allowed, and line range syntax. It could be more explicit about the array nature of the parameter.

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 'Read full file content of one or more files.' This specifies the verb (read), resource (files), and scope (full content), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides explicit guidelines for when to use line number extraction ('Only if the task requires line numbers understanding') and shows the exact format. However, it does not contrast with sibling tools like BashCommand or FileWriteOrEdit, which could help an agent choose.

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