alterios_view_fields_populated

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states it's a read operation, but does not mention safety, side effects, rate limits, or error conditions. With no annotations, the description provides minimal behavioral context.

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 sentence, making it concise and front-loaded. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, lacking explanations that would earn its place. It is appropriately short but incomplete.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description does not explain what the output contains or how to interpret 'populated field metadata'. The tool has 3 parameters (one required) and no schema descriptions, yet the description offers no structure or examples. It is insufficient for an agent to use correctly.

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 input schema has 3 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not explain any parameter's meaning or format. It only repeats the name 'populated field metadata'. The agent receives no additional semantic help beyond the schema's type and required fields.

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 verb 'Read' and the resource 'populated field metadata for an Alterios view'. It distinguishes from siblings like alterios_list_fields (which lists fields generally) and alterios_get_view (which gets view metadata) by specifying 'populated' field metadata, making its purpose specific and distinct.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., alterios_list_fields, alterios_get_view). The description lacks any context about prerequisites, typical use cases, or conditions that would help an agent decide to invoke this tool over others.

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