get_project_samples

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Only states 'Get samples' implying read-only, but does not disclose permissions, side effects, or any behavioral traits beyond parameter listing.

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?

Header line is concise, but the Args list redundantly repeats schema parameters. Could be more integrated or omit the list since schema is provided. Adequate but not optimally structured.

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?

Lacks output description (e.g., returns sample objects with fields), pagination details (like total count), error handling, or common use cases. With 6 parameters and no annotations, more context is needed for a retrieval 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 description coverage is 0% and description merely restates parameter names with trivial descriptions (e.g., 'project_id: The project identifier'). Adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's titles and defaults.

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?

Clearly states 'Get samples for a project with pagination', which is a specific verb+resource. Distinguishes from sibling 'get_samples_for_run' by specifying 'project' context.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_samples_for_run or list_projects. No when-not-to or contextual exclusions.

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