td_get_dat_text

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read operation (non-destructive), but does not disclose behavior for missing paths, permissions, or side effects. The description lacks essential behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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 a single sentence, which is concise but overly brief. It omits crucial details about parameters and usage, sacrificing informativeness for brevity. It is underspecified rather than efficiently structured.

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?

With no output schema and only 2 parameters, the description should fully cover inputs and outputs, but it does not. The tool's return value is unspecified, and parameter semantics are missing. Given the presence of sibling tools like td_set_dat_text, the description fails to complete the context for proper usage.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any parameters. It does not clarify whether 'path' refers to a file path or operator path, nor does it mention the 'max_chars' limit on output length. The description adds no meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 specifies the verb '读取' (read) and resource '文本内容' (text content) from 'Text DAT 等 DAT' (Text DAT and other DATs), making the purpose clear. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like td_get_parameters, which reads parameters rather than text content.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description only states what it does, with no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions. Sibling tools like td_set_dat_text and td_get_parameters hint at alternatives, but the description itself offers no help.

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