Inspect Dataset

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds meaningful context: the operation is confined to a local CSV and does not register it, plus it returns a bounded sample. This goes beyond the safety profile already encoded in annotations.

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 with no filler: the core action and non-registration aspect are front-loaded, the return behavior is stated, and the intended workflow placement is given. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simple parameters, strong annotations, and an output schema, the description covers the operation's purpose, safety, and workflow context. The main gap is parameter semantics: root_id and relative_path are not described, so an agent may not know how to construct valid arguments without further inference.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden of explaining parameters. It mentions 'local CSV' generally but does not explain what root_id or relative_path mean, how they relate, or what formats are expected. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description does not compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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?

States a specific verb ('Inspect') and resource ('confined local CSV'), and explicitly differentiates from registration by saying 'without registering it'. It also names the return value (detected columns and bounded sample), so an agent can tell this apart from register_dataset and preview_dataset.

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?

Explicitly says to use it before register_dataset to build an explicit column map, giving a clear workflow trigger. It does not enumerate when-not-to-use or name alternative tools beyond register_dataset, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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