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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose key behavior: rows are selected by matching any given value and are returned in the order of the provided values. It does not mention handling of missing values, case sensitivity, or response shape, which would add further transparency.

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 a single sentence with no filler. The core behavior is front-loaded, and the usage hint is appended as a brief clarifying aside.

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 two-parameter read tool with no output schema or annotations, the description adequately explains selection criteria and output ordering. It could mention the result format more explicitly, but the title and 'rows' wording make the intent reasonably complete.

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%, so the description must compensate. The description clarifies that 'column' names the field to match and 'values' are the allowed values to filter by, and adds the ordering semantics. It does not restate schema constraints like min/max items, but the core meaning of both parameters is clearly conveyed.

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 states a specific operation: select rows from the Tenantvo dataset where a column matches given values, and return them in the provided order. The 'X vs Y' phrasing implies comparison use, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like dataset_stats or dataset_top, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 when to use the tool via 'for "X vs Y" questions', giving usage context. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as dataset_row or dataset_search, nor does it state when not to use it.

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