engine_create_hypercube

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds valuable context beyond the input schema by explaining that 'Measure sorting is ignored by Qlik Engine' and providing specific guidance on how to achieve top-N results using qSortByExpression. This clarifies important behavioral traits not evident from the schema alone.

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 appropriately sized with two sentences that are front-loaded with the main purpose. The second sentence provides crucial implementation details without unnecessary elaboration. Every sentence earns its place, though it could be slightly more structured for clarity.

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 complexity of the tool (4 parameters with nested objects, no output schema, and no annotations), the description is somewhat complete but has gaps. It explains key behavioral aspects like the engine's handling of measure sorting, but doesn't cover other potential behaviors such as error conditions, performance implications, or what the created hypercube output entails. This is adequate but with clear room for improvement.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds some semantic value by explaining the purpose of qSortByExpression for top-N results and clarifying that measure sorting is ignored, but it doesn't provide significant additional meaning beyond what's in the schema descriptions. This meets the baseline of 3 for high schema 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 clearly states the tool creates a hypercube for data analysis with custom sorting options, providing a specific verb ('create') and resource ('hypercube'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from its siblings (which are all 'get' operations), though the distinction is implied by the 'create' action versus their 'get' actions.

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 implicit usage guidance by mentioning 'To get top-N records, use qSortByExpression: 1 in dimension sorting,' which suggests when to use certain parameters. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., compared to sibling 'get' tools) or provide clear exclusions, leaving some context to inference.

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