get_twbx_calculated_fields

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses that the tool extracts/returns formulas, data types, and field dependencies and implies a read-only parse operation. It does not discuss edge cases, expected output structure, or runtime behavior (e.g., failures on malformed files), but it adds meaningful output expectations.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the main action, with no filler. Each sentence contributes (function, usage, use case).

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 has three required parameters and no output schema, and the description does not explain the boolean flags or fully distinguish from sibling tools. It gives a high-level return summary but lacks enough detail for an agent to correctly choose parameter values and interpret results.

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% and the description does not explain the includeHidden or includeDependencies parameters. It only indirectly references the file path via 'mainTwbPath from unpack_twbx output', which is helpful but insufficient for the three required parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Extracts') and identifies the resource ('calculated fields, parameters, and field definitions from a Tableau workbook (.twb file)'), and clarifies it returns formulas and dependencies. It clearly conveys the tool's function, though it overlaps somewhat with sibling tools like get_twbx_calculation_dependencies without explicit differentiation.

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?

Provides context: use with 'mainTwbPath from unpack_twbx output' and frames the tool as ideal for learning from existing visualizations. However, it does not mention any alternatives or exclusions relative to sibling tools, so it stops short of explicit when-not guidance.

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