List DataLens embeds

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered and the description does not contradict it. The description adds domain context for what an embed is, but says nothing about result volume, pagination, or permissions. Adequate but not rich against the lower annotation-covered bar.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that defines the resource before its qualifier, with no filler. It is tight, though it spends its one clause on a definition rather than on operational 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?

For a one-parameter, read-only list tool with no output schema and full safety annotations, the description covers the essentials. It still omits any notion of what a returned embed contains or whether results are paginated, leaving a minor gap for an agent planning the call.

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% and the single parameter entry_id is fully documented in the schema as 'the id of the entry that is embedded'. The description's mention of 'one entry' merely restates this, adding no format or sourcing detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (embeds) and scopes it to a single entry, plus explains what an embed is ('where a chart or a dashboard is shown on another site'), which distinguishes it from the sibling verbs embeds_create/update/delete. It does not differentiate from adjacent list tools such as datalens_workbooks_entries_list, so it stops 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 statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. Usage must be inferred from the phrase 'of one entry', which implies an entry_id is required but gives no guidance on choosing this list over, say, entries_list or workbooks_entries_list.

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