Delimit Context Read

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds 'Side effects: read-only' and 'Calls ai.context_fs,' but the read-only statement duplicates the annotation and the implementation detail adds limited behavioral context beyond what is already structured.

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 well-organized with clear sections for usage, exclusions, sibling contrast, and side effects. It is mostly efficient, though the 'STR-048' reference and the redundant read-only statement add minor noise.

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 read operation with only two fully documented parameters, an output schema, and annotations covering side-effect safety, the description covers purpose, usage boundaries, sibling contrast, and behavior. Nothing important is missing for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 100% and both parameters are documented in the schema with 'Artifact name. Required.' and 'Venture namespace key. Required.' The description's mention of 'by name within a venture namespace' reinforces the schema but does not add significant meaning beyond it, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Read an artifact from a venture's context filesystem.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from delimit_context_list by noting that list returns names only while this returns a single artifact's content, so an agent can differentiate it from close siblings.

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 explicitly provides 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' guidance, naming delimit_context_list and delimit_memory_search as alternatives. This gives an agent clear routing logic without requiring it to infer intent from tool names.

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