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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds non-obvious behavior: the 20-revision cap, the paging mechanism via next_before/before, and the no-export constraint. Return format specifics are left to the output schema.

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?

Three tight sentences with no waste. The core read scope is front-loaded, followed by paging guidance and the sibling reference, then the boundary statement.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description links the before parameter to the next_before output field to make paging actionable. Complete for a read-only browse tool, with only minor gaps around required identifiers.

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 carry the param burden, and it does for the non-obvious ones: version defaults to the active version, before drives reverse paging off next_before, and table selects the schema to show. It does not spell out dataset_id/workspace_id semantics, but those are self-evident from context.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (read an existing dataset) and enumerates exactly what is returned: description, row counts, table schema, and up to 20 revisions. An agent can distinguish it from browse_dataset_rows and export_dataset without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: omit version for the active version, use before for paging older revisions, and use browse_dataset_rows to read actual records. It also states the negative boundary (does not modify or export), which selects it away from export_dataset.

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