keep_range_rows

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It reveals that the tool appends Table.Range to the table's M query, which indicates a query-modifying side effect. However, it does not clarify whether this is reversible, what happens if offset exceeds row count, or the exact nature of the modification beyond 'appends.'

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 two concise sentences, with the purpose stated up front and additional behavior in the second sentence. No fluff or redundant information; 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?

For a simple transformation tool, the description adequately covers the core operation and its effect (appending to the M query). It does not explain optional partitionName or sessionId, but these are likely standard and not critical. The lack of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema by explicitly stating the sequence: 'skip offset rows then keep count rows,' which clarifies the relationship between offset and count. It also mentions the underlying Table.Range function, providing implementation context. This compensates for the 60% schema description 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's purpose with a specific verb and resource: 'skip offset rows then keep count rows' and 'Appends Table.Range to the table's M query.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like keep_top_rows or skip_rows by specifying a range operation.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention conditions, exclusions, or alternative tools. Usage is only implied by the transformation logic, which is insufficient for selecting among similar operations.

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