Get the metadata of a DataLens bucket object

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the API endpoint is experimental and unmeasured, and an unknown environment returns 403 Permission denied rather than 404, which materially affects error handling.

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, front-loaded with the returned data, then a caveat sentence. It is compact and each sentence adds information, though the phrasing ('An environment nothing knows') is slightly awkward.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must carry the return contract; it does so by naming size and last-modified time. Combined with the error-code note, an agent has enough to call and interpret the tool, though a fuller enumeration of metadata fields would be ideal.

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% with two well-described parameters (path and cloud_environment_id), so the schema does the work. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, which is the expected baseline at full coverage.

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 the resource and what it returns ('size of an object, in bytes as a string, and when it last changed'), which together with the title makes the purpose legible. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling bucket_objects_list or the download/upload URL tools, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus the sibling bucket_objects_list, bucket_download_url_create, or bucket_upload_url_create. The only operational note is an error-code behavior, which is not usage guidance.

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