set_summarize_by

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It explains the core effect (sets default summarization) and implys this is a metadata setting, but it does not mention whether it affects existing visuals, if it persists across sessions, or any side effects/reversibility. The description gives some context but lacks deeper behavioral detail.

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, front-loaded with the core action. The first sentence defines the tool; the second lists values and provides a practical tip. Every sentence earns its place, and there is no fluff or redundancy.

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 configuration tool with no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and a key use case. It does not mention expected return values (not required) or persistence details, but given the simplicity, it is reasonably complete. A small gap: what 'Default' means and how this interacts with existing visuals, but overall adequate.

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 coverage is only 25% (only summarizeBy has a schema description). The description adds value by repeating the allowed values and explaining the special use of None for key/ID columns. However, it does not clarify 'Default' or elaborate on table, column, or sessionId semantics. It partially compensates but not fully.

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 action: 'Set a column's default summarization' with a specific resource (a column). The parenthetical 'the implicit aggregation used when the column is dropped on a visual' adds precise scope, distinguishing it from other set_* tools that target different properties. It is specific, actionable, and unambiguous.

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 a concrete usage tip: 'Set None on key/ID columns so they are not silently summed.' This tells the user when to use a particular value. However, it does not explicitly discuss when to avoid this tool or mention alternatives (e.g., set_aggregation), so it falls short of full guidance.

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