readAgentGuide

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions 'read' implying no side effects, and explains that query is case-insensitive. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool is idempotent, nor does it disclose any potential behavioral traits like authentication needs or rate limits.

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 short and uses bullet points for clarity. It is appropriately sized, though it could be more concise by including all parameter explanations without adding length.

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 the tool has 4 parameters and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the purpose of include_headings or max_chars, and the concept of 'interactive agent guidance' is vague. The presence of an output schema does not excuse missing parameter documentation.

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 4 parameters, but the description only explains section and query, omitting include_headings and max_chars. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate, but it provides minimal meaning beyond the schema for half the parameters.

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 verb 'Read' and the resource 'AGENT_README.md', indicating what the tool does. It also briefly explains the parameters section and query. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools, though the siblings are all LTspice-related, making it distinct.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only lists parameter hints without any decision context, such as when to use section vs query or when not to use this tool.

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