get_table_sample

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'small sample' without specifying size, return format, or behavior on missing tables. It lacks important details like whether the tool is read-only, requires permissions, or how the sample is selected.

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 concise sentence with no fluff. It front-loads the core action and purpose. However, it could be slightly more structured by including a brief note about parameters or return type.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not cover how to use parameters like 'limit' to control sample size or how the sample is returned. For a data-fetching tool, more context is needed for correct invocation.

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 0% and the description adds no information about any of the 5 parameters. It does not explain what 'connection_id', 'table_name', 'schema', 'database', or 'limit' are, leaving an agent to rely solely on the parameter titles and types. No semantic value beyond the schema is provided.

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 action ('Fetch a small sample') and the resource ('from a table') with a specific purpose ('for schema discovery'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'describe_table' (which describes schema without sampling) and 'list_tables' (which only lists tables).

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 mentions schema discovery as a use case, implying when to use the tool, but provides no negative guidance or comparison with alternatives. It does not clarify when not to use it versus siblings like 'describe_table' or 'run_select'.

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