update_dataset_sql

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the preview/replace dual behavior and that confirm=true is needed for the mutation. However, it does not describe side effects like whether the change is irreversible, how SQL is validated, or what happens on failure. The disclosure is minimal but meaningful.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently communicates the core action and the critical requirement in a compact form.

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 tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential usage. It does not explain return values or error conditions, but the tool's simplicity and the clear preview/replace framing make it largely complete. Slight gaps remain regarding validation or post-update behavior.

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 description adds meaning to the 'confirm' parameter by explaining that confirm=true is required for replacement, implying a preview when false. This goes beyond the schema's default value. It does not explicitly define dataset_id or sql, but their names are self-explanatory and the description implicitly references them ('existing virtual dataset', 'SQL').

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 tool's purpose with specific verbs: 'Preview or replace SQL' for 'an existing virtual dataset'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_virtual_dataset and execute_sql by specifying this is about updating an existing dataset's SQL, not creating or executing.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (to preview or replace SQL of an existing virtual dataset) and includes a key usage guideline: 'confirm=true is required' to actually perform the replacement. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the domain is narrow and obvious.

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