get_variable_sample

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the return format ("JSON string with sample values and their indices") and the max_samples cap, indicating a read-only extraction. However, it does not explain how the sample is selected or what happens on errors such as a missing variable.

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 compact and front-loaded with the purpose, followed by a clean Args list and a Returns line. It contains no filler or redundant information.

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 simple read-only sampling tool, the description provides enough to make a correct call: parameter semantics, default value, and return type. The main gap is that the sampling strategy is not specified, which could lead an agent to misunderstand how the sample is chosen.

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%, but the description names and explains all three parameters in the Args section, including file_path, variable_name, and max_samples with its default of 100. This fully compensates for the schema's bare property definitions.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: "Extract a sample of actual data values from a variable for inspection." It clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_variable_info and get_variable_stats, which summarize or describe variables rather than return raw values.

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 phrase "for inspection" implies the tool is for exploring actual data values, but it never says when to prefer this over get_variable_stats or get_variable_info, nor does it mention alternatives. Usage guidance is left to inference rather than being explicit.

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