get_http_function_snippet

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation, and the description's 'Read specific function(s)' is consistent with that. The additional token-efficiency statement is useful behavioral context, but the description does not disclose return format, auth needs, or other operational traits.

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?

Two short sentences with zero waste. The main action is front-loaded and the token-efficiency benefit is stated immediately after, making the description easy to scan.

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-only tool with one well-documented parameter and readOnlyHint annotations, the description is nearly complete enough to select and invoke correctly. It could mention the return shape since there is no output schema, but that omission is minor for this low-complexity tool.

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%, and the single function_names parameter is already well documented in the schema with an example. The description's phrase 'by name' adds minimal meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies when the schema carries the parameter semantics.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Read specific function(s) by name.' It also distinguishes itself from reading the full file, which helps separate it from broader file-read siblings. It does not name the sibling tool get_http_function directly, so it is clear but not fully differentiated by name.

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?

Provides clear usage context by saying it is much more token-efficient than reading the full file, implying use it when only specific functions are needed. It does not explicitly name the alternative tool or state when not to use this tool, so guidance is strong but not exhaustive.

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