Get DataLens collection

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds that the response includes title, description, and parent, which is useful return context not present in annotations, but it does not disclose behavior around the optional permissions flag or any other operational trait.

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 very short and front-loads the key constraint 'by id'. However, it is a sentence fragment without a verb, and it omits useful context such as the optional parameters. It is concise but too terse to be 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?

For a simple read-by-id tool, the schema covers inputs and annotations cover safety, so the description need not explain everything. It partially describes the return fields, but with no output schema the description could say more about what is returned, especially when include_permissions_info is set.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented. The description implies the collection_id lookup but adds no format or syntax details beyond the schema, and it does not mention the include_permissions_info parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter semantics.

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 states a specific resource and scope: retrieving one collection by id, with its title, description, and parent. This implicitly distinguishes it from list-style siblings like datalens_collections_list_by_ids. It lacks an explicit verb and does not name sibling tools, so it falls short of a 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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as datalens_collections_list_by_ids or datalens_collections_breadcrumbs_list. The phrase 'One collection by id' implies a lookup use case, but no when/when-not or alternative routing is provided.

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