xql_add_dataset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only mentions the required license and the dataset type. It does not disclose side effects, error conditions, return values, or whether the operation is idempotent. For a mutation tool, this is a significant lack of 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 concise and front-loaded, with a clear title, one-sentence summary, license requirement, and API endpoint. There is no wasted text, and the most important information appears first.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (nested request_data, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It omits expected response behavior, error handling, prerequisites beyond license, and any guidance on the schema structure. It is minimally adequate for a simple read, but for a mutating dataset operation it needs more.

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% for the top-level parameter, and the description only says 'with the specified name and schema,' missing explicit mention of dataset_type and schema format details. The schema itself provides some nested descriptions, but the description does not compensate for the low coverage.

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 specific action: "Add a dataset of type `lookup` with the specified name and schema." This is a concrete verb and resource, and it distinguishes itself from sibling dataset tools (e.g., xql_get_datasets, xql_delete_dataset) by emphasizing the 'lookup' type and the creation aspect.

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 a required license, which is a clear prerequisite, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention any exclusions. Usage is implied (add a dataset), but no comparisons to sibling tools are offered.

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