dt3_read_text

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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent/destructive hints, but the description adds extra context about what operations it does not perform, which is useful for setting expectations beyond the annotations.

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 concise sentences with no redundant phrasing. Every word adds value, and the key purpose and limitations are stated efficiently.

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 an output schema exists, return values need not be explained. The description covers purpose and limitations but lacks sufficient context on parameter semantics and when to prefer this tool over siblings, leaving some gaps for a new agent.

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 33% (only uuid has a description). The description mentions 'bounded chunk' but does not explain the limit and offset parameters, leaving them ambiguous without additional schema information.

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?

Clear verb 'read' with specific resource (DEVONthink indexed plain text) and additional details about citation and extraction status. Distinguishes from sibling tools like search, list_group, and get_record.

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?

States limitations (no OCR, transcription, spreadsheet recalculation) but does not explicitly name when to use this tool versus alternatives. The 'bounded chunk' hint implies partial reads, but no direct comparison to sibling tools.

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