get_workbook_details

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return behavior by enumerating the metadata fields (title, view names, etc.) and specifies the exact input format with an example. It does not mention error handling or rate limits, but for a simple read operation, the disclosed behavior is reasonably complete.

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 three sentences long, front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by output details and input requirement. Every sentence adds value without repetition or fluff, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the key aspects: what it does, what it returns, and what input is needed. It lacks edge-case or alternative usage details, but these are not critical for a straightforward retrieval tool, making it sufficiently complete.

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 schema already includes a description for workbookName, but the tool description adds a concrete example and explains where to obtain the value from the Tableau Public URL. This reinforces and slightly extends the schema, providing enough guidance for correct invocation.

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 'Retrieves detailed metadata for a single Tableau Public workbook,' using a specific verb and resource. It further lists the types of metadata returned, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_workbooks_list or get_workbook_contents by emphasizing 'single' and 'details.'

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 says 'Useful for getting complete information about a specific workbook,' providing clear context for when to use this tool. It also includes the prerequisite of needing the workbook name from the URL. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclude other scenarios, so it lacks the full 'when-not' guidance.

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