sample_data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'return sample rows,' implying a read operation, but reveals nothing about limits, randomness, or side effects. The parameter schema covers limit constraints, but the description adds no behavioral context.

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 that is easy to parse and front-loads the action. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, though it omits useful context that could be added without becoming verbose.

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?

The tool is simple and an output schema exists, but the description lacks usage context and does not clarify how sampling works (e.g., random vs. first N rows). It also provides no guidance on when to use this tool relative to siblings, making it incomplete for an agent to fully understand its role.

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 input schema fully documents both parameters (limit and table) with descriptions, achieving 100% schema coverage. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions, so the baseline score of 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 clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb ('return') and resource ('sample rows from a table'). It is distinct from sibling tools like list_tables and describe_table, which handle schema or metadata rather than actual data rows.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any context, exclusions, or refer to sibling tools, leaving the agent without direction on choosing this tool.

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