get_data_info

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 states it returns overview, variable details, and optional head rows filtered by requested variables, which is adequate. However, it does not disclose potential performance implications or limitations of the tool.

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?

Two sentences with no waste. First sentence states action and supported formats. Second explains return and usage context. Efficient and well-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?

Given the tool has 4 parameters and an output schema (not provided but exists), the description covers the main purpose, supported formats, and usage context. It lacks details on encoding and head default behavior, but overall fairly complete.

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%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'filtered by requested variables' (relates to vars_list) and 'optional head rows' (relates to head), but does not explain data_path or encoding. Parameter semantics are incomplete.

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 it gets descriptive statistics and a data preview for specific file types (dta, csv, xlsx). It distinguishes from siblings (ado_package_install, help, read_log, stata_do) which are about installing packages, getting help, reading logs, and running Stata do files, respectively.

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 explicitly says 'Use when you need to understand a dataset or have no prior knowledge of the data.' This provides clear context, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives.

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