velixar_discover_data

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions returning source names, tables, and insights but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, if it has side effects, authentication needs, or error behavior. The description is too minimal to ensure correct agent decision-making.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and concisely states what the tool returns. Every sentence adds value without redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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's simplicity and 100% schema coverage, the description is acceptable but lacks completeness: no output schema, no error handling, no pagination info. For a tool with many siblings, more context would help the agent select it 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it only indirectly references the topic parameter. While the schema individually documents each parameter, the description offers no additional semantic value or usage tips.

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 finds data sources containing information about a given topic via a knowledge graph, specifying returns like source names, tables, and insights. While it distinguishes from siblings like velixar_graph_traverse or velixar_list_sources, it does not explicitly differentiate from all related tools.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as velixar_search or velixar_list_sources. It lacks context on prerequisites, limitations, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from purpose.

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