Read a chapter from a book and get its numbered text with word count. Use offset and limit to page through long chapters in read-only mode.
阅读某部作品的某个章节，返回带行号的正文（含字数统计）。可用 offset/limit 分段读取长章节。只读：不写任何文件、不改动任何数据。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| book | Yes | 书名。 | |
| root | No | 章节库根目录。 | |
| limit | No | 最多返回行数。默认 400。 | |
| offset | No | 起始行号，从 1 开始。默认 1。 | |
| chapter | Yes | 章节标识：章号（如 1 或 01）、文件名（第01章.md）或标题子串。 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations present, the description explicitly discloses the read-only nature of the operation ('不写任何文件、不改动任何数据'), which is essential safety information. It also states the output shape, though it does not cover error behavior or edge cases.
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 two tight sentences with no filler; the main action and return value are front-loaded, and the read-only caveat is clearly separated.
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 read tool with no output schema, the description covers the operation, return format, paging strategy, and safety profile. Minor gaps like error handling and parameter interactions are not critical for invoking the tool correctly.
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 coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already documented. The description adds behavioral meaning to offset/limit by framing them as a way to read long chapters in segments, which goes beyond the raw schema text.
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 states a specific verb and resource ('阅读某部作品的某个章节') and specifies the return value (line-numbered text with word count). This clearly differentiates novel_read from sibling list/summary tools like novel_chapters and novel_chapter_brief.
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?
It provides clear context for when to call the tool (read a chapter's body) and adds practical guidance for handling long chapters with offset/limit. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the use case is unambiguous.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.