flipper_read_file

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

With no annotations provided, the description adds valuable behavioral context by explaining that text is decoded by default and binary=true returns base64. It does not disclose error behavior or explicitly confirm read-only safety, but the core behavior is clearly conveyed.

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 entire description is a single, front-loaded sentence that avoids redundancy. Every word earns its place, efficiently conveying the tool's purpose and the key binary option.

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 2-parameter tool with an output schema, the description provides sufficient context for basic usage. It does not mention potential errors or path conventions, but the low complexity and presence of an output schema reduce the need for extra detail.

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%, but the description compensates by explaining the binary parameter's effect (base64 output) and implicitly clarifies path as the file location. It does not elaborate on path format or constraints, but the essential semantics are covered.

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 action (Read) and the resource (a file from the Flipper), with an additional behavior detail about decoded text vs. base64 binary. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like flipper_list_dir and flipper_stat by focusing on file content retrieval.

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 implies usage for reading file contents, but does not explicitly mention when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., flipper_stat for metadata) or state any exclusions. The binary flag guidance is parameter-focused rather than providing contextual when-to-use advice.

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