stream_large_file

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states it returns multiple chunks but omits details such as response format, error behavior, or whether it is a read operation. More behavioral context is needed for safe invocation.

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 succinct, front-loaded sentences. No wasted words. The core action and purpose are immediately clear.

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?

Despite good conciseness, the description lacks completeness given the tool's complexity. It does not explain how chunks are delivered (e.g., response structure, pagination) or how to process them. The absence of an output schema further burdens the description to provide this context.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema; it only reiterates that chunks are returned. No parameter descriptions are enhanced.

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 tool streams a large file in chunks for efficient processing. It uses a specific verb and resource, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tool 'read_large_file_chunk', which likely serves a similar purpose.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'read_large_file_chunk'. The description implies use for large files requiring multiple chunks, but there is no explicit when-not or mention of alternative scenarios.

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