fm_run_script_with_globals

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

No annotations provided, so description bears burden. It describes the session flow and global setting, but lacks details on side effects, error handling, permissions, or destructiveness. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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: two sentences plus a flow arrow. No wasted words, front-loaded with the main action.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the core idea but omits details like error behavior, required permissions, or what happens if login fails. Adequate for a simple tool.

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 covers all 4 parameters. The description adds value by explaining the globals key format ('Table::FieldName_g') and the purpose of setting globals in the same session, going beyond schema.

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 action: sets global fields and runs a script in the same Data API session, distinguishing from sibling 'fm_run_script' which likely does not set globals. Example and flow provided.

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 explains when to use (scripts depending on global fields) and provides a flow. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives; the context of sibling tools implies it.

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