kotor_read_gff

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

Description discloses read-only behavior and hints at large response sizes by advising to use field_paths/max_depth/max_fields to stay under limits. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden, and it adequately covers behavioral aspects without 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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then parameter guidance, then read-only flag. No unnecessary words; every sentence adds value.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should clarify what is returned. It states 'full GFF tree as JSON', which is sufficient. It advises on handling large responses, contributing to completeness. A minor gap could be explaining that GFF is a nested structure, but not essential.

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 baseline is 3. Description adds value by explaining the purpose of optional parameters (field_paths, max_depth, max_fields) in the context of response limits, going beyond the schema's individual descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'read' and resource 'GFF tree as JSON', lists example resource types (DLG, UTC, ARE), and distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying it returns the full tree.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'when you need the full GFF tree as JSON'. Provides guidance on using field_paths, max_depth, and max_fields to stay under limits. Does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but sibling tool names like kotor_describe_dlg imply alternatives exist.

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