df_get_consolidated_rmd

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it returns a single consolidated raw payload, but it does not disclose behaviors like cache usage, response size, or implications of include_sql.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then enumerates the payload composition. Every phrase adds information and there is no filler.

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?

The description adequately sketches the return payload, which matters because there is no output schema. However, it leaves optional parameters unexplained and does not clarify how the response map to the sibling tools, so it is minimally viable but with clear gaps.

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 only 40%; only project_id and version_id have descriptions. The tool description does not compensate by explaining language, use_cache, or include_sql, leaving three parameters effectively undocumented in both schema and description.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Get the full raw export of a project version') and enumerates the payload contents: RMD content plus dimension groups, fact tables, and relationships. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like df_get_rmd, which would only provide the RMD content.

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 implies this is the consolidated alternative to more granular tools, but it never explicitly states when to use it versus df_get_rmd, df_list_fact_tables, or df_list_relationships. No when-not-to-use guidance or alternative routing is provided.

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