sassy_read_multiple

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and parameter format, but does not disclose return structure, error behavior, or any constraints like maximum file count or size limits.

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 consists of two short sentences. The purpose is stated first, followed by a concise parameter explanation. Every word is useful; no filler.

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?

For a simple read tool, the description covers the core purpose and parameter format. An output schema exists, so return values are documented elsewhere. However, it misses edge-case behavior like handling of missing files or partial failures, which an agent would benefit from knowing.

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 explains that the 'paths' parameter is a JSON array of file paths, which adds meaning beyond the schema's bare 'type: string' and compensates for the 0% schema description coverage. However, it lacks details on path syntax (absolute vs relative), whether globs are allowed, or examples.

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 multiple files at once', which specifies the action (read) and the resource (multiple files). It naturally distinguishes itself from the sibling tool sassy_read_file, which reads a single file.

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 conveys a clear use case: use this tool when you want to read multiple files in a single operation. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it (e.g., no direct contrast with sassy_read_file).

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