workiva_get_table_properties

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

The description only restates the operation name and parameter, without disclosing behavioral details like read-only nature, error handling, or what 'table properties' entails. With no annotations, the agent is left uninformed about side effects or requirements.

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 brief but the 'Args' section redundantly repeats schema information without adding value. It is under-specified rather than concise, omitting essential context.

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 the many sibling tools and an output schema, this sparse description fails to fully contextualize the operation. It doesn't specify the table domain or when to prefer this tool, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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 description clarifies that table_id is a UUID, adding a small semantic improvement over the schema's 'Table Id'. However, it does not explain the table context (e.g., spreadsheet vs Wdata) or what properties are returned.

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 'Get table properties' with a specific verb and resource, and the parameter is documented. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'workiva_table_properties' or clarify which table domain it applies to.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'workiva_wdata_get_table' or 'workiva_table_properties'. No context, exclusions, or prerequisites are provided.

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