data_summary_from_csv_text

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

The description lacks behavioral details beyond the basic operation. It does not disclose how malformed CSV is handled, whether headers are expected, what statistics are included, or any limitations. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only provides a minimal summary and return type.

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 compact: one sentence for purpose, then a clear Args/Returns block. Every element serves a purpose and nothing is redundant. It is well-structured and easy to parse.

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 with 2 parameters, but no output schema exists, so the description should clarify the return format. It only says 'Dictionary with data summary and statistics,' which is vague about which statistics are computed. It also omits edge-case handling, making it insufficiently complete for a robust evaluation.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description includes an Args section explaining both parameters: csv_text as 'CSV data as text' and delimiter as 'CSV delimiter.' This adds needed meaning beyond the raw schema, though the definitions are somewhat minimal.

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 'Generate summary statistics from CSV text data,' specifying the verb (generate), resource (CSV text data), and intended output (summary statistics). This distinguishes it from sibling statistical tools that likely operate on other input formats.

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?

Usage is implied by the mention of 'CSV text data,' suggesting this tool is for when input is in CSV text form. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives like descriptive_statistics, nor any exclusions or comparisons.

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