plan_dataset_onboarding

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as idempotency, required permissions, or side effects. It omits what 'planning' entails and what happens during execution.

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 sentence, which is concise. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices necessary detail; it is under-specified rather than efficiently informative.

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 5 parameters, no descriptions, no annotations, and a non-trivial output schema (not shown), the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what the plan generates, how images are selected, or what constraints exist.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate but fails. Only dataset_path is implied via 'local image or an image directory'; the remaining four parameters (task, targets, intensity, max_images) are completely unexplained.

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 specifies a clear action ('plan the first safe preview') and resource ('one local image or an image directory'). Although the verb 'plan' is abstract, it distinguishes from sibling tools focused on policies or reviews.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like plan_augmentation_policy or plan_preview_review. The phrase 'first safe preview' hints at initial exploration but does not explicitly state exclusivity or conditions.

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