kotor_read_2da

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral transparency. It mentions 'Read-only', which indicates no side effects, but lacks details on performance, error handling, authorization, or behavior with invalid parameters. Minimal disclosure.

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 extremely concise—one sentence that covers the essential purpose and filters. No unnecessary words, and the key verb and resource are front-loaded. Every word earns its place.

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 tool has 5 parameters (2 required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the JSON return format, error scenarios, or the meaning of row ranges in the context of 2DA tables. More context is needed for effective 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for parameters like game, resref, row_start, row_end, and columns.

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 the verb 'read', the resource '2DA table', and the format 'JSON' with optional filters. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like kotor_lookup_2da, which may offer similar functionality.

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 phrase 'Use when you need a 2DA table as JSON' implies when to use, but there is no guidance on when not to use, prerequisites, or alternatives. The context is implied but not explicit.

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