get_twbx_data_profile

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses supported formats (CSV, Excel, JSON), unsupported formats (.hyper/.tde), and an optional image inventory feature. This gives the agent insight into tool capabilities and constraints, though it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or describe error handling.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no filler. Every sentence adds value: one for main functionality and supported formats, another for usage context and optional features.

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?

Despite having no output schema or annotations, the description provides essential context: what data is extracted, which file types are supported or not, and how the tool fits into the unpack_twbx workflow. It does not describe the exact return format, but for a profile tool that extracts column names, the purpose is sufficiently clear.

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?

Although the schema itself provides descriptions for all three parameters, the tool description adds some clarification by mentioning the extraction path from unpack_twbx and the optional image inventory. However, it does not describe twbFilePath's purpose, relying on the schema's description. Given the schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Extracts column names') and its resource ('data files in an extracted TWBX package'). It also lists supported and unsupported file types, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_twbx_workbook_structure that focus on workbook metadata rather than data column extraction.

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 explicitly says to use it with the extraction path from the unpack_twbx tool, providing clear context for when to use it. It also notes unsupported .hyper/.tde files, implying those require Hyper API, but does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusions.

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