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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, and the description reinforces these while adding new context: it reads only the active API key's organization and is not separately rate-limited. This goes beyond the structured annotations without contradicting them.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and compact overall. The phrase 'Read-only and non-destructive' somewhat duplicates the annotations, but the rest of that sentence contributes new behavioral detail, so the waste is minimal.

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 one-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description names the return payload fields (row_count, columns, roles_summary, formulas, query_hints), scoping, and rate-limit behavior. It is sufficient for correct invocation, though 'relationship metadata' is not further elaborated.

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 single parameter dataset_id is fully documented in the schema, including its origin from connect_data or list_data. The description mentions that lookup is by dataset_id but adds no new parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 opening sentence states a specific verb and resource: 'Get a saved dataset plus its schema and relationship metadata by dataset_id.' It also distinguishes this tool from get_data_summary by positioning that tool as a 'low-token look' while this returns the full dataset record and schema fields.

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 names the alternative get_data_summary and advises using it first for a low-token look, which gives an agent a clear routing path. It does not, however, list broader exclusions or conditions for when not to use get_data_schema, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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